Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to award school transport assistance to Mr X’s child because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council refused to award school transport assistance to his child.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.(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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X applied to the Council for school transport assistance for his child.
6. The Council refused to issue school transport assistance due to having limited information from Mr X about the reason his child needed support travelling.
7. Mr X went through two appeals to try to have the decision changed. The Council arranged for Mr X to have the appeal heard a third time because it realised Mr X had misunderstood the requirement on his part to provide suitable evidence.
8. Mr X supplied the Council with suitable evidence. Within one week of the third panel hearing the Council changed its decision and awarded Mr X’s child school transport assistance.
9. The third appeal panel was before we started our assessment.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman