Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision on school transport. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the application and appeal.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council did not consider her son’s Special Educational Needs (SEN) when deciding her application for free school transport. She also complains it delayed considering her appeal.
2. Miss X seeks a refund for the cost of travel for the 2023/24 academic year, including for herself to accompany her son, and compensation for distress and inconvenience.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X applied for home to school transport for her son in April 2024. The Council refused because the school was not the closest suitable school. Miss X appealed this decision on the grounds the route was unsafe, her son’s SEN had not been considered and due to the family’s financial situation.
8. The Council considered Miss X’s appeal in August 2024. Its response shows it considered her son’s SEN, including how these impact on the safety of the walking route. The appeal panel found Miss X’s son could safely walk the route to school when accompanied, and that to accompany a child of his age is reasonable.
9. The panel also considered the choice of school and Miss X’s financial situation. The Council’s guidance is clear that parental choice has a significant impact on eligibility for school transport. While the family is eligible for free school meals and therefore extended rights eligibility, this would only apply if the child was attending one of the three nearest appropriate schools.
10. In recognition of the situation and the delay, the panel agreed to exercise discretion and approved backdated funding for transport for Miss X’s son for the Summer Term only, of the 2023/24 school year i.e. from 15 April 2024. This is in line with the Council’s policy, that funding agreed at appeal will be backdated to the start of the academic year or the date of the appeal request, whichever is later.
11. We are not an appeal body, and the decision to refuse school transport is not one we can question in the absence of fault in the decision-making process. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the appeal or in the way it exercised discretion to provide backdated funding. I will not investigate this part of the complaint.
12. Miss X also complains the guidance she was provided around walking distances was unclear. However, the Council’s published home to school transport policy makes it clear how measurements are made for transport decisions. I will not investigate this part of the complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault.
13. The Council’s guidance on school transport appeals says the parent can ask for a review of the application which the Council must respond to within 20 working days. The parent then has another 20 working days to seek an appeal by an independent panel, which can take up to 40 working days.
14. Based on these timescales, there was a delay of around 8 working days before the Council sent the final appeal response. However, this was not long enough to cause significant injustice and so I will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the appeal, and any delay did not cause significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman