Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision her child is not eligible for free home to school transport. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains about the Council’s decision her child does not qualify for free home to 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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We do not start 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))
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Council’s Home to School Transport Guidance 2023/24 which is published on its website.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X applied for free transport to school for her son. The Council refused her application. It explained he did not qualify for free school transport because the school he is attending is not the nearest appropriate school.
9. The Council’s school transport policy says that to qualify for free transport a child must attend the nearest appropriate school.
10. Ms X appealed the Council’s decision and provided additional information about her personal circumstances and reasons for choosing this school for her son in support of her appeal. She explained the school is too far for him to walk and she cannot afford to buy him a bike or pay for his bus pass.
11. The panel considered the information Ms X provided but did not uphold the appeal. It was satisfied the policy had been correctly applied in this case and that there were not sufficient grounds for it to allow the appeal outside of the Council’s policy.
12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council here. It has considered and decided Ms X’s application and appeal in line with its published policy. Ms X exercised parental choice in sending her son to a school which is not the nearest appropriate school, however this does mean he is not eligible for free home to school transport. This is clearly set out in the Council’s published policy.
13. We are not an appeal body and it is not our role to question the Council’s decisions where, as here, there is no sign of fault in the way in which it was reached.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is no sign of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman