Summary: The complainant says the Council has broken a verbal agreement to provide a 2-year transport contract for her son’s college course. We will not investigate this complaint. It is unlikely an investigation will discover any meaningful evidence flowing from verbal discussions which took place 18 months ago. And I understand the Council continues to provide transport. Therefore, it is unlikely an investigation will lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mrs D, has broken an agreement to provide a 2-year transport contract in exchange for her withdrawing an appeal to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal (SENDIST).
2. She says the Council only arranged for a 1-year contract. This means her son must have a different driver for the final part of the first year of his course and another for the second year.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Mrs D which includes some of her correspondence with the Council.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms D has a son who I shall call ‘K’. She says she agreed to withdraw an appeal to SENDIST in 2020, in exchange for the Council providing 2 years transport with the same driver, given K’s aversion to change.
6. She says in discussion with a Council Officer she was assured a 2-year contract would be awarded for the period the Council provided K with transport to college.
7. In March 2021, Mrs D says K’s taxi driver told her he would not be driving K to college after the Easter holidays. He said the 1-year contract he signed the previous year was ending and had secured another longer contract.
8. Mrs D complained to the Council that it was acting contrary to the agreement for 2 years transport for K with the same provider. She stated:

“I would not have agreed to vacate the SENDIST appeal based on a 1-year transport contract for a 2-year course where the only way for [K] to attend is with SEN transport.”

9. The Council says the officer who corresponded with Mrs D in 2020 stated that at no point did she agree that a 2-year contract would be in place for transport. It says the officer recalled confirming that if K was attending a 2-year course, then 2 years transport would be provided. The Consent Order provided to SENDIST confirms this.
10. In its final response to Mrs D’s complaint, the Council says that it cannot offer 2-year contracts for post 16 transport as the tendering is carried out yearly. And the contract allows drivers and operators to end the contract giving 1-month notice, which happened in this case. The Council also points to its travel assistance policy which says that it may not always be possible to provide the same vehicle operator, driver, or passenger assistance.

Assessment

11. I understand Mrs D believes the Council verbally agreed to provide a 2-year contract for transport for K. However, in an email to the Council she says:

“I only agreed to drop the SENDIST appeal based on the provision of 2 years transport preferably with the same driver to provide continuity, although I recognised this was not guaranteed”

12. The Council says it confirmed that if K was attending a 2-year course, then 2 years transport would be provided if travel training is not successful.
13. From the information I have seen, the Council is continuing to provide transport for K to attend college. I have not seen any indication that this will not continue for the final year of his course.
14. Mrs D says she accepts the Council made an error but wants a full investigation. She says she made a verbal agreement for a 2-year contract preferably with the same driver. The Council says it confirmed if K attends a 2-year course, then 2 years transport will be provided. This is confirmed in the words of the Consent Order.
15. I do not intend to investigate this complaint. Mrs D is referring to an alleged verbal agreement, and there appears to be no written confirmation. It is unlikely an investigation will discover any meaningful evidence flowing from verbal discussions which took place 18 months ago. Also, I do not consider it a good use of our resources to seek an apology, which is the only remedy we could reasonably seek, were we to find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I will not investigate this complaint. The complaint concerns verbal conversations which took placed over a year ago. And K continues to receive transport to college. Therefore, I consider it unlikely that further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman