Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to properly consider all the relevant information when she appealed its decision to deny school transport assistance for her son Y. She said the decision has had significant negative impacts; causing anxiety, stress and logistical challenges for Y and the family. We find no fault in the way the Council made its decision. Because of this we cannot question the outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council incorrectly denied home-to-school transport assistance for the school her son Y attends. In particular she complains the Council:

• Did not consider all the information, including case law cited by Mrs X, when making its decision during her appeal.
• Incorrectly decided the school was parental preference, rather than a necessity based on Y’s educational needs.

2. Mrs X said the Council’s decision caused distress and anxiety for Y and the wider family as they are worried about how he will attend the school that best meets his educational needs. Mrs X is having to arrange transport for Y to his school which is time consuming and challenging.

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. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

Statutory guidance

7. The Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance (the statutory guidance) from January 2024 says local authorities must make free-of-charge travel arrangements for ‘eligible children’ to attend their nearest suitable school. ‘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).
8. The statutory guidance says a ‘suitable school’ for school travel purposes is a school that is suitable for the child’s age, ability, aptitude and any special educational needs they may have.
9. It says ‘suitable school’ does not mean the most suitable school for a child. Schools are able to meet a wide range of needs. The nearest secondary school to the home of a child of secondary school age, for example, will almost always be their nearest suitable school.
10. The statutory guidance says councils should have an appeals process in place for parents who wish to appeal a decision.
11. It recommends councils adopt a two-stage appeal process. It recommends at stage two that an appeal panel, independent of the original decision-making, consider verbal or written representations. It recommends the panel should notify the parent the outcome and clearly explain:

• whether they have upheld the original decision;
• why they reached that decision;
• how the review was conducted;
• the factors considered in reaching their decision;
• which other agencies or departments were consulted, if any.

The Council’s policy

12. The Council’s Home to school transport and travel assistance policy (the Council’s policy) says it will provide assistance or make free travel arrangements for pupils aged 8 to 16 years who are attending their nearest suitable school and who live more than three miles from that school. Its definition of suitable school is broadly in line with the statutory guidance.
13. The Council’s policy refers to parental preference. It says it supports the right of parents to express preferences for schools. However, in order to be eligible the child must be attending their nearest suitable school which has places available.
14. The Council’s policy explains the appeal process when people feel that the wrong decision has been made. It states the grounds on which an appeal can be made, including where a person believes the Council has failed to take into account some significant factor. It is a two stage process broadly in line with the statutory guidance.

What happened

15. In May 2024 Mrs X applied to the Council for travel assistance for her son Y who was due to start secondary school in September 2024. She listed a school on the application that I will refer to as school Z.
16. In June the Council wrote to Mrs X and told her it had declined her application. It said school Z was not the nearest suitable school and was therefore parental preference. It said councils do not have a duty to provide free transport for pupils whose parents have chosen to send them to a school that is not the nearest suitable school. It listed two closer schools. Mrs X later confirmed she had not applied for places at either of the closer schools.
17. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision. She argued it had misunderstood the definition of a “suitable school” for Y. She said that the two closer schools were geographically closer, but were not suitable because their academic performance and overall suitability did not align with what she and her husband considered essential for Y’s education. She said school Z was the therefore the closest suitable school for Y because it provided the necessary support and environment for his educational growth.
18. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision. She appealed on various arguments including references to section 7 of the Education Act 1996, the Council’s policy, Y’s aptitude for two subjects that school Z focused on, school Z’s academic specialisations and wider strengths, three pieces of case law, the logistical challenges of transporting Y to school Z, and the Council’s failure to respond to an inquiry she had sent requesting improved bus services to school Z.
19. In early July the Council wrote to Mrs X and declined her appeal. It repeated the original reasons for declining the application. It noted Mrs X had referred to the Education Act in her appeal. It explained why that argument did not change its decision by referring to the statutory guidance. It did not refer to every argument that Mrs X made in her appeal.
20. Mrs X promptly applied for a stage 2 appeal. She maintained the decision to decline her application did not consider her full range of arguments. She expanded on the arguments from stage 1 and made additional arguments on points including equity and fairness.
21. In August the Council heard the stage 2 appeal. It was heard by a panel that had not had any previous involvement in the case. The Council produced an appeal agenda pack that included background papers for the panel’s consideration. Mrs X also attended and provided verbal evidence.
22. The Council wrote a stage 2 decision letter to Mrs X the day after the hearing and declined her appeal. It summarised the background, Mrs X’s case, questions that had been clarified at the hearing, and the reasons for its decision. It did not refer to every argument Mrs X made across both her appeals.
23. Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman about the Council’s decision.

Analysis

24. Mrs X complained to us because she believed the Council’s decision making at stage 2 of the appeal process was flawed. She said this was because it did not consider all her arguments including Y’s specific educational needs, relevant law and legal precedents, and treated their choice as a mere preference rather than a necessity based on Y’s educational needs.
25. I have reviewed how the Council made its decision. Mrs X attended the hearing and gave verbal evidence. The appeal agenda pack included the following background papers:

• Mrs X’s application for home-to-school transport.
• The Council’s initial decision to reject the application.
• Mrs X’s stage 1 appeal.
• The Council’s stage 1 Appeal decision.
• Mrs X’s stage 2 appeal.

26. The Council did not keep minutes of the discussion but the stage 2 decision letter stated the members of the panel were independent and gave full and careful consideration to all the information and evidence provided. It listed the background papers and summarised the verbal evidence provided by Mrs X. I find this is evidence the panel considered all the arguments Mrs X raised, including, but not limited to, her representations about Y’s educational needs, the law and legal precedents she cited, the bus service to school Z, and the disagreement as to whether the selection of school Z was parental choice or necessity. The Council’s view that school Z is not Y’s nearest suitable school is in line with the statutory guidance.
27. The stage 2 decision letter did not refer to every argument Mrs X had made but I find it was sufficiently detailed. It set out the nature of the decision reached, how the review was conducted, what factors were considered, and the rationale for the decision reached.
28. I have identified a potential error in the Council’s stage 2 decision letter. It described its decision school Z was parental choice, not the nearest suitable school, and referred to sections of the Children and Families Act 2014. I believe that might be an error because the sections of that Act relate to Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans and Y does not have an EHC Plan. However, this has not affected my decision because there is no evidence the presence or absence of an EHC Plan was a factor in any part of the Council’s decision making throughout the period I investigated. Therefore I have decided it would not have had a bearing on the key issue of whether school Z was a suitable school under the statutory guidance and Council’s policy.
29. I have seen no evidence the Council’s handling of the appeal significantly departed from the statutory guidance or the Council’s policy. For this reason I find no fault in the way the Council made its decision. Because there was no fault in how the Council made its decision, I cannot question the outcome.

Back to top

Decision

30. I have completed my investigation and do not uphold Mrs X’s complaint. I find no fault in the way the Council conducted the appeal and therefore cannot question its decision.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman