Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about home to school transport. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X complained the Council wrongly refused her request for a Personal Transport Budget (PTB) to cover the cost of transporting her child (Y) to school.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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’. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
6. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Miss X’s daughter (Y) has an EHC Plan naming School Z. Miss X first asked the Council to provide help with transport for the 2021/22 academic year. The Council refused Miss X’s request on the basis Y was not attending the nearest school which could meet her needs.
10. The Council has recently accepted its decision was wrong. The closer school it had referred to could not meet Y’s needs. Also, it had only named School Z in Y’s EHC Plan. When this is the case, the school named in the EHC Plan is the nearest suitable school. It cannot be used as a reason to refuse transport. The Council agreed to pay Miss X a PTB dating back to the 2021/22 academic year.
11. The Council was therefore at fault. This caused injustice to Miss X in the form of frustration, uncertainty and distress. She was also put to time and trouble and had to fund her child’s transport.
12. When someone has suffered an injustice, we try to put them back in the position they would have been had that error not occurred. We look at each case individually and on its merits. We also use our Guidance on Remedies to decide what actions a council should take.
13. In this case, the exception at paragraph 3 applies. Much of Miss X’s complaint is late and she could have come to the Ombudsman sooner. We will only therefore consider the injustice caused during the last academic year.
14. The Council’s offer to backdate the PTB is in line with our Guidance on Remedies and is what we would have asked for if we investigated. Our guidance also states that in cases like this we can ask for a symbolic payment for uncertainty or distress.
15. We therefore asked the Council to remedy the remaining injustice caused by making a payment of £200 to Miss X to resolve the complaint early. The Council has agreed, and it should make the payment within four weeks of this decision. We have previously found fault with the Council in a similar case and recommended service improvements.
16. The Council has agreed to a suitable remedy and previously accepted our recommend service improvements. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the Council has offered a suitable remedy for the identified injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman