Summary: There was no fault in how the Council made its decision on school transport provision for Miss X’s child. It did so in line with its policy and there is no evidence of fault in how it approached this decision or how it considered Miss X’s appeal.

The complaint

1. Miss X says the Council has refused to provide her child (C) with transport from home to school. Miss X said this means they now must walk an unsafe route to meet transport at a nearby pick-up point.
2. Miss X says the Council provided her older children with a taxi because of safety reasons and the Council would not explain why it was treating C differently.
3. Miss X says this has caused her distress and she is concerned about potential danger to C.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. Before issuing this final decision statement, I considered;

• Miss X’s written complaint to the Ombudsman and the supporting information she provided;
• the Council’s responses to Miss X’s appeal;
• the relevant statutory guidance and the Council’s policy as referred to in the relevant section below.

7. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on the draft decision statement and to provide new evidence they considered relevant to the complaint. I considered any further information before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

Law and guidance

8. Councils have a duty to provide free home to school transport for ‘eligible children’. (Education Act 1996, section 508B)
9. ‘Eligible children’ are children of compulsory school age who:
• Live within statutory walking distance but cannot reasonably be expected to walk to school because of the nature of the route, or because of their special educational needs, disability or a mobility problem; or
• live beyond the ‘statutory walking distance’; or
• receive free school meals, or whose parents receive the maximum Working Tax Credit. (Education Act 1996, Schedule 35B and Home to school travel and transport statutory guidance paragraph 16)
10. The ‘statutory walking distance’ is three miles for a child aged eight and over, measured by the shortest route along which a child, accompanied as necessary, may walk safely.
11. Councils must secure ‘suitable home to school travel arrangements, for the purpose of facilitating the child’s attendance at the relevant educational establishment’ and provide these free of charge. (Education Act 1996, s.508B(1))
12. ‘Home to school travel arrangements’ for an ‘eligible child’ are defined as ‘travel arrangements relating to travel in both directions between the child’s home and the relevant educational establishment in question in relation to that child’. (Education Act 1996, s.508B(3))
13. The statutory guidance says about ‘suitability of arrangements’ that:
• Consideration should be given to the walking distance required to access public transport. The maximum distances will depend ‘on a range of circumstances, including the age of the child, their individual needs and the nature of the routes they are expected to walk to the pick up or set down points and should try to be combined with the transport time when considering the overall duration of a journey’.
• Councils ‘may at their discretion use appropriate pick-up points when making travel arrangements. For arrangements to be suitable, they must also be safe and reasonably stress free, to enable the child to arrive at school ready for a day of study’. (Statutory guidance paragraph 35)
14. The statutory guidance says local authorities should adopt a specific appeals procedure, although it will be left to councils to determine what is an appeal and what is a complaint. The guidance says an appeal can include a challenge to the transport arrangements offered. (Statutory guidance Annex 2)
15. The appeals procedure should follow two steps. The first should involve review by a senior officer. The second should be a review by an independent appeal panel which can consider verbal and written representations from a parent. (Statutory guidance – Annex 2)

The Council’s policy

16. The Council operates a scheme that requires applications for transport to be made before the academic year and signposts applicants to an information sheet for guidance.
17. The information sheet says the Council have a duty under the Education Act to provide home to school transport for children when they meet specific criteria.
18. It also says where the Council provides transport, parents will be responsible to take and collect their children to and from the nearest boarding point. This point can be up to a mile away. The policy also says the route from home to the boarding point will not be assessed for safety.

What happened

19. In October 2022, Miss X appealed against the Council’s decision not to provide school transport for C from home. In her appeal she said the route to the pick-up point was unsafe because it was a narrow country lane and there was nowhere for pedestrians to walk other than on the roadway.
20. A service manager wrote back to Miss X and did not overturn the Council’s earlier decision. The manager gave several reasons for their decision:
• C lived within one mile of the pick-up point for school transport;
• parents are responsible to ensure their child gets to the pick-up point;
• it would not assess the route from home to the pick-up point for safety.
21. The service manager told Miss X that the Council reviews school transport routes periodically and it terminated a previous taxi service in 2022. The manager told Miss X that the Council had followed its policy in not providing a taxi from C’s home.
22. Miss X made a stage two appeal and said the Council gave her two elder children a taxi service because of safety concerns. As part of her representations, she accepted it was her responsibility to get C to the pick-up point, but she said she should still be able to do this safely.
23. The Council panel considered Miss X’s appeal. It said the route had been reviewed as circumstances had changed. It also noted Miss X had not said she could not take C herself to the pick-up point.
24. The panel considered the distance C lived from the pick-up point and decided safety was not a concern. It said this because the route C would take was like other routes in the locality. The Council then wrote to Miss X and said it did not see any reason to overturn its decision.
25. The Council’s internal emails say it provided transport in 2018 for Miss X’s older children. Miss X said it transported her older children from home to school and back again.
26. The emails say the Council provided the taxi service for Miss X’s other children because the local bus service that C now uses was at full capacity at that time.

My findings

27. The Council followed its policy and the statutory guidance in making its initial decision. It also followed the statutory guidance in the steps it took to consider Miss X’s appeal.
28. The statutory guidance does allow for boarding points; however, arrangements for these boarding points ‘must also be safe and reasonably stress free’.
29. The evidence shows the Council previously provided a taxi service for Miss X’s older children and did not do this for C because of capacity considerations.
30. The Council considered C’s safety in Miss X’s stage two appeal. It noted Miss X had not said she was unable to take and collect C from the pick-up point, and this is supported by Miss X’s representations. It also noted the route C was expected to take was like routes others were taking in the locality.
31. It is not my role to adjudicate on the merits of Miss X’s case. We are not an appeal body that can use our judgement to replace a decision taken by the Council on the suitability of home to school transport arrangements, or the safety of this route. Instead, our role is to look at the process followed by the Council, to ensure that those in the position of Miss X, who wish to appeal a school transport decision, have had their appeal considered properly and fairly.
32. The Council made its decision in line with its policy. In the absence of any fault in how the Council considered Miss X’s appeals, I cannot question the outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

33. There was no fault in how the Council decided not to provide home to school transport for C.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman