Summary: We have found no fault with how the Council reached its decision to reject Mrs X’s application for school transport allowance for her son. The decision was made in line with national and local policy.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council refused to provide free home-to-school transport for her son, Y. She said other people in her village received transport allowance and their children attend the same school as her son. She feels this is unfair and discriminatory.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether an organisation’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered Mrs X’s complaint and have spoken to her about it.
5. I have also considered the Council’s response to Mrs X.
6. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

School transport policy

Home to School Travel and Transport Guidance: Statutory Guidance for Local Authorities

7. Local authorities must make suitable home to school travel arrangements as they consider necessary for ‘eligible children’ of compulsory school age to attend their ‘qualifying school’. The travel arrangements must be made and provided free of charge. The relevant qualifying school is the nearest school with places available that provides education appropriate to the age, ability and aptitude of the child, and any special educational needs the child may have. ‘Eligible children’ include:
• children living outside ‘statutory walking distance’ from the school (two miles for children under eight, three miles for children aged eight and above);
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot reasonably be expected to walk to school because of their special educational needs, disability or mobility problem;
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot walk to school because the route is unsafe; and
• children entitled on low-income grounds. (Education Act 1996, 508B(1) and Schedule 35B)
8. Councils should have appeals process in place for parents who wish to appeal about the eligibility of their child for travel support.
9. It recommends councils adopt the following appeals process:
10. Stage 1: review by a senior officer. Within 20 working days of receiving a parent’s written request to appeal the decision, a senior officer reviews the original decision and sends the parent a detailed written notification of the outcome of the review setting out the nature of the decision, how the review was conducted, what was taken into account, the rationale for the decision reached, and how to escalate their case to stage 2; and
11. Stage 2: Within 40 working days of receipt of the parent’s request for an independent appeal panel to consider written and verbal representations, a detailed decision is sent setting out: the nature of the decision reached; how the review was conducted; what factors were considered; the rationale for the decision reached; and information about appealing to the Ombudsman.

School transport for 5 to 16 year olds: Eligibility for free school transport

12. The Council policy states that a child can get a free bus or train travel pass, if they are:
• Primary age (up to 11 years old) and live more than 2 miles walking distance to their nearest/nearest school.
• Secondary age (11 to 16 years old) and live more than 3 miles walking distance to their nearest school.
13. The policy states that for the normal school admissions round, unless there are exceptional circumstances, the Council assumes the nearest school will have space to accommodate the child.
14. The policy goes on to say that if parents chose to apply for a place in a school that is not their nearest, then the child will have no transport entitlement to that preferred school.
15. The Council supports transport assistance for children based on a religious preference as follows:
• Pupils that qualify under extended rights legislation (for low-income families).
• Pupils who qualify under the ‘nearest’ school rule.
• Other pupils based on an individual assessment of their circumstances.

What happened

16. Mrs X and her family live in a village on the border of two counties, these are separate education authorities (Council A and Council B). The county border crosses through Mrs X’s property.
17. Mrs X applied for a secondary school place for her son, Y during the normal admissions round on time during September and October 2020. The national offer day was 1st March and Y started Year 7 in September 2021.
18. Y’s school is within Council A’s authority area.
19. Eight years ago, Mrs X was given the choice of which Council her property fell into for the purposes of school travel when her son started primary school. She chose Council B. Mrs X said the Council moved the boundary so that she was within Council B’s area. Council B provided travel allowance to Y’s primary school. Mrs X thought this would continue when Y started secondary school.
20. Mrs X wanted a faith school for Y and this was not the nearest school to their home. Y was allocated a place. Once Y had been allocated a place, Mrs X applied to Council B for school transport allowance. She was told she needed to apply to Council A as this was where the school was located. Mrs X then applied to Council A. The Council refused allowance based on Y’s school not being the nearest to his home.
21. Mrs X appealed the decision. She said her son would not have been offered a place at the nearest school as it is oversubscribed, and their village is some distance away. She said she applied for the faith school because she knew places were allocated on religion not distance.
22. Mrs X appealed to the Independent Appeal Panel. She said the Council’s decision was discriminatory by not taking the family’s faith into account when it comes to transport provision. The Panel considered the Council had followed policy when reaching its decision and there were no exceptional circumstances in Y’s case. The Panel dismissed Mrs X’s appeal.

My findings

23. The Council’s policy said that parents must apply for schools in order of distance to be eligible for school transport. Y’s school is not the nearest to the family’s home. Mrs X explained why she did not apply for the nearest school and instead choose a faith school. The Council considered Mrs X’s reasons but determined the circumstances were not exceptional.
24. The Council considered whether Y was eligible for transport assistance as he attended a faith school. His family is not a low-income family, the school is not his nearest, and there are no individual circumstances the Council identified which would make Y eligible. Therefore, he did not meet the criteria for assistance. I have found no fault with how the Council considered this.
25. The Council reached its decision in line with the national and local policy for school transport. The appeal and Panel hearing were conducted in accordance with regulations. There is no fault.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I have completed my investigation. There is no fault with how the Council reached its decision to refuse school transport for Mrs Y’s son.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman