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

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about the Council’s decision her son 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 and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X applied for free home to school transport for her son. The Council refused her application, in line with its policy, because Mrs X’s son is not attending the nearest suitable school.
8. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision and provided additional information about her family’s circumstances and her reason for choosing the school. She also questioned the routes the Council used to calculate the distances from home to school.
9. The Council considered the additional information Mrs X provided but upheld its original decision to refuse the application. It found no exceptional grounds to agree the application outside of its policy. It explained the method of measuring distances was as set out in its published policy.
10. 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. The relevant qualifying school is the nearest school with places available that provides education appropriate to the age, ability and aptitude of the child, and any special educational needs the child may have.
11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council here. It has considered and decided Mrs X’s application in line with its policy and guidance which sets out the eligibility criteria for free home to school transport. Mrs X exercised her parental choice not to send her son to the nearest suitable school and she has explained her reasons for choosing this school, however this does mean her son does not meet the criteria for free school transport to that school.
12. We are not an appeal body and it is not our role to question the merits of the Council’s decision where, as here, there is no sign of fault in the way in which it was reached. It decided and refused the application in line with its published policy having considered all the information Mrs X provided. This is a decision the Council was entitled to make.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman