Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s school transport policy, allegations of sub-contracting, and issues with the taxi-driver leaving her child unsupervised and leaving her before she was received into the care of an adult. We consider further investigation will not add to that carried out by the Council. Nor would it lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

2. Mrs X complains the Council:
• failed to review its school transport policy and risk assessment
• failed to investigate her concerns about taxi firms sub-contracting; and
• failed to investigate her complaint that her daughter was left unsupervised for a period while the driver assisted another child.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 organization 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X complained to the Council about its school transport policy, subcontracting of transport and unsafe behaviour of a taxi driver.

7. The Council confirmed:
• when Mrs X complained, a formal consultation on proposed changes to its transport policy had not started
• the company that provides the taxi for Mrs X’s child confirms it has not subcontracted the route (although they can do so to other companies listed in the Council’s Dynamic Purchasing System)
• signage relating to other companies displayed on the taxi is a matter for the company and its staff member. Display of the signage is not a breach of Council’s transport policy or contact with the company.
8. Mrs X also complained her child was left unsupervised for a period while the driver assisted another child. The Council says it interviewed the driver who confirmed this was not the case. I understand Mrs X says her child says they were left unsupervised, and the driver denies this. The Council says under the circumstances there is no way to take this issue further.
9. The Council also confirmed it has reminded all operators that drivers must wait for a responsible adult to receive the children into their care before leaving.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the Council:
• confirms it has reviewed its school transport policy and the revised policy is published on its website
• cannot take the concern that her child was left unsupervised any further for lack of evidence
• has looked into her concerns about a taxi operator sub-contracting and is satisfied this is not the case; and
• reminded drivers that children must be received by a responsible adult.

I consider that further investigation of her concerns will not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman