Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide her son with free transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council for us to question the merits of its decisions.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mrs X, complains about the decision not to provide her son with free transport to school.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Councils must apply their transport policy when deciding entitlement to school transport. But they also have the discretion to consider exceptional circumstances. They must have a review or appeal process by which to do so.
7. Mrs X asked the Council to provide her son, Y, with free transport to school. The Council refused. Mrs X had chosen to send Y to a grammar school which was not the nearest suitable school to their home.

8. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision. She said:
• Y was academically bright
• They live in a village with no safe walking distance to school
• The school bus stopped next to their home and had a spare seat available
• She followed the school bus in her car when taking Y to school
• Taking Y to school will impact on her working arrangements for the next five years.
9. The Council considered Mrs X’s appeal at the final stage of its process.
10. The Council explained why it had refused Mrs X’s request. Mrs X’s representative presented her case and the panel asked questions. The panel considered Mrs X’s information. It decided the Council had properly applied its policy. The panel noted the additional information provided by Mrs X. However, it decided the information provided was not sufficient to exercise discretion and disapply its policy.
11. Mrs 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 evidence available shows the panel reached a decision it was entitled to, taking into account the information it received. Based on the evidence available, it is unlikely an investigation would find enough fault with the way the Council has acted to question the decisions reached. We will not therefore investigate Mrs X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council for us to be able to question the merits of its decisions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman