Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council handled a change to her son’s school transport and that it did not implement the recommendations it made after upholding her complaint. We found the Council delayed in responding to Mrs X’s contact about the transport. The Council agreed to apologise for the uncertainty and frustration this caused to Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council increased the number of people in her son Y’s transport to school without consultation or proper consideration of his needs, and did not implement the recommendations it made after it upheld her complaint. Mrs X also complained about how it handled her complaint and it failed to consider if its persistent complainants policy had an impact on her complaint. Mrs X states this caused her and her son, Y frustration.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. 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)
6. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. Part of Mrs X’s complaint is about the Council’s application of the persistent complainants policy in handling her complaint. I investigated how the Council applied the policy in relation to this complaint only.
8. I did not investigate the Council’s decision to apply or review the persistent complainants policy in general. This is because we have already made decisions on those points in separate investigations.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I read the documents provided by Mrs X and discussed the complaint with her on the telephone.
10. I considered the documents the Council sent in response to my enquiries.
11. 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

Relevant legislation, guidance and policies

School transport

12. 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)

Council’s persistent complainants policy

13. The Council has a ‘Dealing with unreasonably persistent complainants and unreasonable complainant behaviour’ policy. It sets out how the Council will respond to complainants who hinder its ability to respond to complaints due to the frequency, nature and quality of their contact with the Council. It states the restrictions it imposes will be appropriate and proportionate. It states any new complaint from someone that it applies the policy to, will be treated on its merits.

What happened

14. This section provides a summary of key events. It is not intended to cover everything that occurred during the relevant time period.

Background

15. The Council wrote to Mrs X in October 2021 and explained it had decided to apply its persistent complainants policy to Mrs X. It said:
• Mrs X could only email two specified email addresses (the inbox).
• Any emails Mrs X sent to other email address would be recorded but would not receive a response.
• It would provide an auto acknowledgment of emails received but not further acknowledgement except at the discretion of the service dealing with the enquiry.
• Unless correspondence was deemed urgent, it may take up to ten working days to respond, if Mrs X emailed on the same topic within the ten days the response time would increase.
• It would only respond if it deemed it to be legally necessary which meant repeated correspondence on the same point would not be responded to.
• Mrs X should add ‘complaint’ into the email subject header for any new complaint she wanted to make.

Relevant events

16. Mrs X’s son, Y was entitled to school transport and had been going to school in a taxi.
17. Mrs X emailed the inbox specified at the end of November 2021 and said the Council had changed Y’s taxi without consultation. Mrs X said this was inappropriate. Mrs X asked for a copy of the risk assessment and an explanation of why it did not inform her of the change. The email did not include ‘complaint’ in the subject header. The Council said it did not treat this matter as a complaint.
18. The Council said it wrote a letter to Mrs X in December 2021. It explained the changes to the transport were a trial. A risk assessment had been completed but it could not share it due to data protection. It said it should have notified Y and Mrs X in advance and apologised it had not. It said no issues had been reported since the start of the trial.
19. Mrs X did not receive the letter. The Council stated the responding officer sent the letter to the inbox to be forwarded to Mrs X. It has no evidence that it actually sent it on to Mrs X.
20. Because Mrs X had not received the letter, she did not know it had responded and she sent further emails to the Council. Mrs X sent the emails to officers’ email addresses and not the inbox. The Council did not respond.
21. In correspondence about another matter the Council told Mrs X it was formulating a response to her initial email about the taxi and did not deem it urgent. Mrs X sent further emails to officers’ email addresses with comments about the transport and lack of Council response, none were marked as ‘complaint’.
22. The school Y attended contacted the Council in January 2022 about its concerns for other children using the same taxi as Y. The Council investigated further.
23. The Council wrote to Mrs X. It said it had not received any further complaints about the transport and so believed it was running smoothly. It said it would make changes to the transport for the rest of the academic year to benefit Y, which it would arrange as soon as possible. The Council made those changes quickly.
24. Mrs X sent an email to a Council officer’s email address in February 2022 as she was dissatisfied with the Council’s response. She said the Council had told her in December that it was preparing a response, but she had not received one, and it had not addressed all her concerns about the transport. The Council did not respond.
25. Mrs X complained to us in July 2022. We asked the Council to consider Mrs X’s complaint at stage two and provide her with its response.
26. The Council investigated Mrs X’s complaint and found:
• It had prepared a response in December 2021 and returned it to the correct mailbox for sending to Mrs X, but it had not sent it due to human error.
• The school had raised concerns about two other pupils which was the reason it investigated further. It had not responded to Mrs X until the school raised the concern.
• It upheld the complaint about the changes to school transport and apologised to Y for the discomfort he experienced.
27. As a result the Council recommended a review of its school transport policy to ensure it was clear about when passenger escorts should be used. It also recommended a review of its risk assessment procedure to involve the family/school where it intended to make changes to transport, and to ensure trials had timescales and success measures. The Council offered to pay £100 to Y for the distress caused to him by the transport changes, and £50 to Mrs X to remedy injustice caused to her by its delay in responding. It asked Mrs X to contact it if she wished to accept the £150.
28. The Council provided evidence during my investigation that it completed a review of its transport policy and risk assessment procedures, and made relevant changes since Mrs X raised the issue in November 2021.

My findings

29. Mrs X complained the Council made changes to Y’s transport to school without consultation or proper consideration of his needs. The Council considered Mrs X’s complaint about this matter and agreed that it did not do this, which was fault. I did not investigate this point further as it would not lead to a different outcome.
30. The Council recommended a review of its policy to provide clarity on the use of escorts, and review the risk assessment procedure and trial processes. I have seen evidence the Council completed that review and has updated its policies and relevant template documents. The changes reflect that it will consult with parents and schools when making changes to current arrangements. This was an appropriate action and therefore no further service improvements are needed.
31. The Council offered to make payments to Mrs X and Y for the avoidable distress and time and trouble caused to them. The offer was in line with our guidance on remedies. The Council has offered the payment to Mrs X and it is open for her to contact the Council if she wishes to accept it.

Complaint handling

32. Mrs X also complained the Council failed to properly respond to her complaint.
33. When Mrs X first contacted the Council about this matter she did not raise it as a complaint. The Council said it wrote a response to Mrs X’s contact within the 10-day timescale set out by the persistent complainants policy. There is no evidence the Council sent the response to Mrs X. The Council said it was due to human error. Mrs X believes it was because of the persistent complainants policy. I have not been able to establish why the response was not sent to Mrs X and so I cannot make a finding on a balance of probabilities on that point.
34. However, Mrs X should have received a response to her contact and did not. The Council also mistakenly told Mrs X that it was still formulating a reply, after the Council said the responding officer had completed its response. That was fault and caused Mrs X frustration and uncertainty about whether the Council properly consider her contact initially. The Council has already offered Mrs X a symbolic payment to remedy the injustice she experienced. I have made a further recommendation below.
35. The Council handled Mrs X’s further contacts in line with its persistent complainants policy and the letter it sent to Mrs X in October 2021. At that time it was unaware Mrs X had not received its initial letter. This meant that it did not respond to repeated contacts on the same matter, or to emails that were not sent to the inbox. When it received information from the school about the transport it investigated and responded accordingly which included telling Mrs X of the outcome. There was no fault in its actions.
36. The Council considered Mrs X’s complaint when we asked it to do so. It responded to all her points of complaint and provided appropriate recommendations. There is no evidence the Council’s application of the persistent complainant policy impacted its consideration of Mrs X’s complaint about this matter.

Back to top

Agreed action

37. Within one month of this decision the Council will write to Mrs X and apologise for the injustice caused to her by the Council’s failure to ensure she received a response to her contact about Y’s school transport. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council will consider this guidance in making the apology.
38. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

39. I have completed my investigation. I found fault causing injustice and the Council agreed to my recommendation to remedy that injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman