Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide Mrs X’s son with free transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained 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 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 information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X asked the Council to provide her son, Y, with free transport to her preferred school (School C). Mrs X applied for transport due to the withdrawal of the public bus services her son previously used. The Council refused Mrs X’s application. It said Mrs X had chosen to send Y to a school which was not the nearest suitable school to their home. This meant he was not entitled to free transport.
7. 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. Mrs X appealed the decision not to provide Y with free transport.
8. The Council considered Mrs X’s appeals in line with its published process. A senior officer refused Mrs X’s appeal at the first stage of its process. A panel of elected members considered Mrs X’s appeal at the final stage of its appeals process.
9. Mrs X attended the appeal. The Council explained why her application had been refused. It referred to a selective school which was closer than School C and which had spaces. It explained that it was Mrs X’s choice to send Y to a school which was not the closest to home. Mrs X had not listed the closest school to her home as a preference when she applied for a school place. There were discussions about the application processes for school places and school transport.
10. Mrs X had the chance to present her case. Mrs X explained she was happy to pay for transport, but the Council’s Vacant Seats scheme did not guarantee transport. Mrs X explained all the nearest schools were over the distance required to qualify for free transport. Mrs X said the closest school (School B) was full and explained why she wanted Y to attend School C. Mrs X’s local councillor sent an email in support of the appeal.
11. The panel considered the information presented by the Council and Mrs X. It decided the original application had been properly dealt with. The panel noted that when a child does not attend the nearest appropriate school, it was a parents’ responsibility to provide transport. The panel decided the Vacant Seats scheme was adequate for Y to travel to School C. The panel’s consideration of this included the need to purchase a seat and that there was no guarantee a place would be available. The panel noted there was no additional cost to add Y to an existing contract, but this could change. The panel decided there were not enough grounds to make an exception to the Council’s policy and to provide free transport.
12. We are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions which have been properly taken. I understand Mrs X is disappointed with the Council’s decision. But it has applied its published policy, considered her appeals, and the stage 2 panel reached a decision it was entitled to take. The Council and panel have explained their decisions.
13. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant further consideration by the Ombudsman. We will not therefore start an investigation into Mrs X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman