Summary: Mrs B complained about the Council’s refusal to provide suitable school transport for her daughter since September 2023. We have not found fault with the actions of the Council.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complained that Reading Borough Council (the Council) failed to provide suitable home to school transport for her daughter, C since September 2023 and is unreasonably insisting on meeting with C’s paediatrician without Mrs B present. This has caused Mrs B and C significant distress and inconvenience.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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

4. I have considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant, made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. Mrs B 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

School transport

5. 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.
6. If only one school is named in a young person’s Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan, then that is the school the council has determined is the nearest suitable school for the child. It is therefore the nearest ‘qualifying school’ for the child to attend for school transport consideration. This is because the council has not made arrangements for the child to attend a closer school. (S and another v Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council [2012] EWCA Civ 346.) Where the child is attending the ‘nearest suitable school’, they will qualify for free transport, provided any other relevant conditions are met.

Transport appeals

7. Councils should have an appeals process in place for parents who wish to appeal about the eligibility of their child for travel support.
8. The statutory guidance recommends councils adopt the following appeals process:
• Stage 1: review by a senior officer. Within 20 working days of receiving a parent’s written request to appeal the decision, a senior officer reviews the original decision and sends the parent a detailed written notification of the outcome of the review setting out the nature of the decision, how the review was conducted, what was taken into account, the rationale for the decision reached, and how to escalate their case to stage 2; and
• Stage 2: Within 40 working days of receipt of the parent’s request for an independent appeal panel to consider written and verbal representations, a detailed decision is sent setting out: the nature of the decision reached; how the review was conducted; what factors were considered; the rationale for the decision reached; and information about appealing to us. (Department of Education, Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance 2023, Part 5)

What happened

9. Mrs B’s daughter has health conditions and special educational needs. She has an EHC Plan which names her current school (the parental preference). The estimated journey time to the school in the morning is between 30 and 60 minutes and in the afternoon, 30 to 50 minutes. The Council says Mrs B chose the school and was aware of the journey times. C started there in January 2023.
10. The Council provided taxi transport shared with another child. Initially the Council agreed for an escort to accompany C in the taxi to help her settle into the new journey. The Council said this was only a temporary arrangement until Easter 2023 and was not provided for medical reasons. The escort stopped in July 2023 after C had been at the school for two terms.
11. Mrs B complained to the Council in early August 2023 because she had not received a response to her queries about the transport arrangements for September. The Council informed her that that C would have to wait for an hour at the end of the school day for the taxi because the child she was sharing with had moved to secondary school with later finishing times. Mrs B said it was unreasonable and would affect C’s physical and mental health. She requested a separate taxi.
12. The Council responded at stage one of its complaints procedure on 21 August 2023, saying:
• The school had confirmed it could look after C during the wait and has done so in other cases.
• A separate taxi would cost £15,200 per year which was prohibitive and not an efficient use of its resources.
• It offered to pay Mrs B a mileage allowance to transport C herself.
13. Mrs B escalated her complaint to stage two of the complaints process. C started back at school on 1 September 2023.
14. On 11 September 2023 the school wrote to the Council to say that C did not have an escort. It noted the taxi driver had got out of the car and handed her over to school staff, but she needed an escort to keep her safe in transit and to bring her into school. On 13 September 2023 Mrs B sent a letter from a medical support worker on behalf of C’s paediatric consultant saying that the new transport arrangements have caused C anxiety and made the journey more stressful which could ultimately destroy the school placement.
15. The Council said the letter was not actually written by a doctor, so Mrs B provided a copy countersigned by C’s consultant. The Council requested permission to talk to the consultant to discuss the issue of an escort, but Mrs B refused.
16. In September 2023 Mrs B complained that the Head of Service was investigating her complaint. On 25 September 2023 the Council clarified that it had dealt with her stage one complaint incorrectly through the complaints process but was dealing with her stage two complaint through the transport appeals process.
17. On 10 October 2023 the Council held an appeal hearing. The Council explained its view that the escort was only ever a temporary arrangement until Easter 2023 but had remained until July 2023. Escorts are only provided for children over the age of five with a specific identified need. The Council was not satisfied that the letter was from the consultant and wanted to talk to them to discuss the need for an escort but Mrs B had refused permission for this to happen without her being present. Mrs B said C is picked up at 7.30 am and is not back home until 5.30 pm. It is too long a day and she is tired, which leads to her missing school. She also said the taxi service had had five different drivers in a month which was distressing for C.
18. On 7 November 2023 the Council sent the appeal outcome to Mrs B. It said the panel had been unable to reach a decision on the need for an escort because Mrs B would not let the SEN team meet with C’s consultant. The Panel agreed that C would be picked up 10 minutes later in the morning. It said that Mrs B could either agree for the SEN team to meet with the consultant or accept a direct payment so they could arrange their own transport.
19. On 23 November 2023 the school sent an email to the Council saying that C needed an escort to bring her into the building and during the taxi journey due to occasional toileting accidents.
20. Mrs B said to me that C was slowly getting used to the journey and there had only been two toileting incidents this year. The driver was the same female which helped with C’s anxiety levels. She was upset that the SEN team had suggested C wore nappies for the journey if she was concerned about accidents.
21. In response to my enquiries the Council said:
• C attends an appropriate after-school club while she waits for the taxi.
• The school was requesting an escort for transport on the school site which is not the role of a transport escort or driver;
• C’s EHC Plan does not refer to any transport needs or the need for an escort;
• The letter from the medical support worker was dated 13 September 2023, less than two weeks after the new travel arrangements had started, without having seen C and is only based on what Mrs B reported to them. It does not say C requires an escort due to existing health needs and the medical support worker was not in a position to comment on the impact on C’s education.
• The Council would expect the changes to the travel arrangements to have caused some mild anxiety for a brief period. The placement has not broken down and the school had not reported any impact on her learning.
• Mrs B has continued to use the transport despite the option to have a personal budget to transport C herself.
• It is standard practice for professionals to meet to discuss cases and the Council did not understand why Mrs B had objected to this suggestion. If Mrs B had agreed to the meeting in September between the SEN Team and the consultant, and if the consultant had agreed that an escort was needed for medical reasons then the situation could have been resolved months ago.

Analysis

22. The decision on whether or not to provide a separate taxi with an escort for C, is a decision for the Council to make. It is not my role to remake that decision. I am only looking at the way in which the decision was made. If I do not find fault in the process, then I am unable to recommend any changes.
23. I understand Mrs B’s concerns about the changes to C’s transport arrangements. However, I have not identified any fault in the way it made the decision: it considered all C’s circumstances including the evidence put forward by Mrs B in support of an escort or a separate taxi. It noted the original escort was only temporary for settling in purposes and no transport needs have been identified in her EHC Plan. The school’s request was for an escort to accompany C into the school building which was not a function of a transport escort and again was not an identified need in the EHC Plan. It also felt Mrs B had allowed very little opportunity for C to adjust to the new arrangements.
24. It has balanced the lack of evidence of a medical need for an escort or of problems with the arrangements against the significant cost of providing the separate taxi and concluded that on the available evidence a separate taxi is not justifiable. I have not found fault with this approach.
25. In addition, it has given Mrs B the option to provide consent for the Council to obtain further information from C’s consultant on her medical needs and it will reconsider the decision in the light of this information. It is usual for a Council to wish to clarify medical evidence with a medical professional and I do not consider it is unreasonable to wish to do that without Mrs B being present. If Mrs B has concern about the content of any information provided she can ask for a copy of it. The Council has also given Mrs B the option of a personal travel budget to make her own arrangements. I consider these are reasonable ways forward for Mrs B to pursue if she remains unhappy.
26. I also note the placement has not broken down and C continues to use the transport with few problems.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have completed my investigation into this complaint as I am unable to find fault causing injustice in the actions of the Council towards Mrs B.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman