Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to communicate with Mrs X before stopping school transport for her children with special educational needs. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to communicate with her before temporarily removing her two children with special educational needs from their school transport.

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 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X’s two children have special educational needs (SEN) and have been assessed as requiring transport between home and school.
6. Mrs X complained to the Council after the decision was made to temporarily remove her children from school transport after an incident took place where other children were hurt. Mrs X was unhappy with the decision as well as the fact the Council failed to communicate with her about what had happened.
7. The Council upheld Mrs X’s complaint and explained the children’s travel arrangements were temporarily stopped so the Council could discuss the incident with the children’s school. The Council advised a delay was caused because Mrs X was unwilling to resume transport with the same passenger assistant and acknowledged it failed to communicate with Mrs X. The Council offered to reimburse her for her travel costs for the period she was required to take the children to school.
8. Mrs X was unhappy with the Council’s response and escalated the complaint to stage 2. She asked the Council several questions about the incident and the Council’s response to the complaint.
9. The Council again upheld Mrs X’s complaints and responded to her questions. The Council also offered Mrs X a £150 goodwill award in recognition of her time and trouble.
10. Mrs X has brought the complaint to the Ombudsman because she remains unhappy with the Council’s response. The evidence shows the Council has investigated what happened and conceded fault in how it responded to this matter. The Council has explained its actions and offered to reimburse Mrs X for her travel costs and to provide her with a financial award. These were reasonable actions for the Council to take and in line with the Ombudsman’s approach. An investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome for Mrs X.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman