Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide his daughter with free transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the decision not to provide his daughter with free transport to school.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered Mr X’s complaint, information from the Council, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

5. Councils must apply their transport policy when deciding entitlement to transport assistance. But they also have the discretion to consider exceptional circumstances. They must have a review or appeal process by which to do so.
6. Mr X’s daughter (Y) attends secondary school. Y attends a selective school which is not the nearest qualifying school to their home. This means there is no automatic entitlement to transport assistance.
7. In October 2019, the Council agreed to provide Y with free transport to school, via a taxi, after an operation on her spine. Transport was granted by a panel of councillors at the second stage of the Council’s transport appeals process. Transport was granted until October 2021.
8. In August 2021, Mr X asked the Council to continue to provide Y with transport to school. He said Y had missed school due to COVID-19 and so she had not been able to take full advantage of the transport previously granted. Mr X said it would be two years before the success of the surgery could be properly assessed. Taxi transport would minimise the risks to Y’s spinal fusion. It would also avoid the risks associated with bus travel – such as a harsh ride or having to stand if there were no seats.
9. A panel of elected members again considered Mr X’s request. Mr X attended the appeal which was held remotely due to COVID-19.
10. The Council explained why it had refused Mr X’s request. Mr X had the opportunity to present his case and the panel asked questions. The panel considered the information it was presented with. It decided the Council had properly applied its policy. The panel noted that Y did not attend the nearest qualifying school. It recognised a previous panel had granted transport, but that circumstances had now changed. The panel referred to the fact Y’s mother had recently given birth when transport was previously granted. The panel said it had not seen any evidence Y’s mother could not take her to school. The panel decided there were no reasons to make an exception to its published policy. It refused Mr X’s appeal.
11. Mr X disagrees with the panel’s decision. But this is not evidence of fault. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body, and we cannot criticise a properly made decision or intervene to substitute an alternative view. As I explain in paragraph 3, we can only criticise a council’s decision if there was fault in the way it was reached.
12. The Council has applied its transport policy and there is no indication of fault in the way it did so. Appeal panels are entitled to make their own judgements on the information before them. They need to look at each case on its merits.
13. The evidence available shows the panel reached a decision it was entitled to, taking into account the information it was presented with. It explained its decision to Mr X. Based on the evidence available, it is unlikely an investigation would find fault with the way the Council has acted.

Back to top

Final decision

14. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and so we cannot question the merits of its decisions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman