Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide home to school transport. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. It is reasonable for Ms X to make a fresh application from her new address.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complained the Council had refused her application for home to school transport for her child. The Council refused the application because the distance from home to school was less than the required three miles. Ms X now lives at a different address and believes the Council should provide 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal. (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

Final decision

5. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to refuse Ms X’s application. Now Ms X has moved she can submit a fresh application and it is reasonable for her to do so. If the Council refused Ms X’s request for transport, she would have a fresh right of appeal. If this was refused, Ms X could come back to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman