Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for free home to school transport for her daughter. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for free home to school transport for her daughter. Miss X says the Council has not applied its school transport policy correctly or fairly and delayed in dealing with her application. She says they live within the catchment area for the school and another child was granted school transport in the same circumstances as theirs. Miss X also questions why the Council will not allow her to pay for a bus pass for her daughter.

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 or continue 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 Council’s Home to school/college transport policy 2024/2025.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Miss X initially applied for, and was granted, free school transport for her daughter for her new school placement starting in September 2024. This was awarded in line with the Council’s policy as it was for transport to her nearest suitable school which was over 3 miles from their home address.
9. Miss X then secured a place for her daughter at a different school which is further away. She applied for school transport for her daughter to that school. The Council refused the application because it is not the nearest suitable school and she does not live in the frozen catchment area for the school. It explained that in declining the place at the nearest suitable school Miss X’s daughter is not eligible for free school transport to a preferred school which is further away.
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. ‘Eligible children’ include:

• children living outside ‘statutory walking distance’ from the school (two miles for children under eight, three miles for children aged eight and above);
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot reasonably be expected to walk to school because of their special educational needs, disability or mobility problem;
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot walk to school because the route is unsafe; and
• children entitled on low-income grounds. (Education Act 1996, 508B(1) and Schedule 35B)

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council here to warrant an investigation. The Council has considered, decided and refused her application in line with its published school transport policy. As Miss X’s daughter is no longer attending the nearest suitable school she does not qualify for free home to school transport under the Council’s policy. Whilst Miss X says another child was granted school transport in the same circumstances this does not indicate fault by the Council in its consideration of Miss X’s application. Each application will be considered on its own particular circumstances. It has decided Miss X’s in line with the policy. We are not an appeal body and it is not our role to question the Council’s decision where, as here, there is no sign of fault in the way it was reached.
12. The Council responded to Miss X’s contact within its expected timeframes for contact to the department during the school holidays. I can see from the information Miss X provided that she is already aware the transport provider will not allow paying customers for insurance reasons. That is not a matter we will consider.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.
     

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman