Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to the complainant’s application for school transport assistance. This is because it is not for the Ombudsman to take a view on the substantive matter, which is the complainant’s daughter’s eligibility for school transport assistance.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mrs B, complains that the Council declined her application for a personal transport budget for her daughter and reimbursement of the costs she has already incurred.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs B applied for school transport assistance in the form of the payment of the cost of fuel to take her daughter to school. She also asked for the costs she had already incurred to be reimbursed.
6. The Council refused the application and set out Mrs B’s right to appeal against its decision. She did not take up her rights under the appeal procedure. Instead, she made a formal complaint to the Council.
7. In response to Mrs B’s complaint, the Council again set out the reasons for refusing her application. It said that it is carrying out an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment (EHCNA) and, if this results in an Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP) naming the school to which Mrs B is taking her daughter, it will pay for the transport and reimburse the costs already incurred.
8. It is not for the Ombudsman to take a view on whether the Council should pay Mrs B’s transport costs. The appeal process set out by the Council was the appropriate way to challenge the Council’s decision and the Ombudsman would expect the process to be used. Mrs B did not do so. That is a matter for her, but does not provide grounds for us to intervene.
9. The Council has undertaken to pay transport costs if the Final EHCP names the relevant school. We will not speculate on the outcome of the EHCNA and, in any case, the content of the EHCP carries the right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability). There is no role for the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because we cannot take a view on the substantive decision about which she complains.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman