Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her transport application, and for awarding a personal transport budget. She said this was not suitable to arrange private taxis and she has had to transport her child to school, causing significant difficulties to the family. We found the Council at fault for its communication and the way it provided a personal transport budget. The Council has now agreed to arrange home to school transport for her child. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment to recognise the remaining injustice, and take action to prevent recurrence of fault.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about how the Council handled her transport application, appeals, and its decision to award her a personal travel budget to make school transport arrangements for her child. She says this does not meet her child’s needs due to the unavailability of other taxi services, and this has caused significant frustration and distress to all of the family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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)
4. 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

5. I discussed the complaint with Ms X and considered her views.
6. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its written responses and information it provided, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and administrative background

8. 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. ‘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; and
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot walk to school because the route is unsafe.

9. The law allows councils to meet their duty for eligible children in a number of ways, as long as the council has the consent of the parent. With the agreement of a parent, the council, for example, might provide expenses to enable the parent to make their own travel arrangements for their child.
10. The Council’s transport appeal process is as follows:

• Stage 1: review by a senior officer. Within 20 working days of receiving a parent’s written request to appeal the decision, a senior officer reviews the original decision and sends the parent a detailed written notification of the outcome of the review setting out the nature of the decision, how the review was conducted, what was taken into account, the rationale for the decision reached, and how to escalate their case to stage 2; and
• Stage 2: Within 40 working days of receipt of the parent’s request for an independent appeal panel to consider written and verbal representations, a detailed decision is sent setting out: the nature of the decision reached; how the review was conducted; what factors were considered; the rationale for the decision reached; and information about appealing to us.
  (Department of Education, Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance 2023, Part 5)

Background

11. Ms X’s child (“Y”) has complex special educational needs and an Education, Health, and Care (“EHC”) Plan. The previous year, the Council provided a taxi for Y as the distance to Y’s school was over the statutory walking distance. Ms X said they never had any issues with this transport. The school had now moved to a different site closer to Ms X’s home, within two miles.

What happened – summary of key relevant events

12. In late March 2024, Ms X submitted a school transport application for Y. Ms X provided supplementary evidence of Y’s needs. She included reference to their EHC Plan, outlining why they could not walk to school, even if accompanied.
13. On the application form, it said if found eligible, a personal budget may be considered for parents to make their own transport arrangements. Ms X ticked the box confirming she was “not interested in being considered for a personal budget”.
14. In late May 2024, the Council wrote to Ms X. It said Y (mainly referred to with the name of a different child) was not entitled to transport with a taxi or minibus. It said there was no evidence to support why Ms X could not take Y to school or walk with Y.
15. Ms X requested to appeal, providing medical evidence from a GP and supporting letter from the school.
16. In early July 2024, the Council wrote to Ms X with its Stage One appeal response. It outlined its previous findings that it had no evidence to show Y could not walk to school. After review, it was pleased to offer a personal budget to support Ms X.
17. In mid-July 2024, Ms X made a detailed request to appeal at Stage Two. She disputed the Council’s view she did not provide evidence. She said it did not properly consider all evidence she provided which clearly supported Y could not walk to school because of their special needs.
18. In September 2024, the Stage Two appeal was heard. The Council’s notes of the hearing included what was discussed, including:
• The Council’s case: It initially looked at shared transport, but it had no availability on Ms X’s route. It recognised Y could not walk to school safely so decided the parents could arrange a taxi funded through a personal budget. It agreed this was reasonable with the SEND caseworker and Senior Manager when looking at resources and sustainability.
• Ms X’s case: Ms X said she tried arranging a private taxi for a two-week period at the start of September, but it did not work out. It was inconsistent with pick up and drop off times, causing disruption to Y’s routine and causing Y anxiety and distress. Due to its unreliability and the impact on Y, Ms X and her partner started taking Y to school themselves, causing additional stress with their work schedules. It was having a severe impact on all the family. Ms X’s advocate explained why the Council was not complying with its duty to provide suitable transport for an eligible child, as it could only rely on parents arranging this where it is voluntary.
• The Panel’s questions: the Panel explored and asked both parties about considerations and logistics around the transport provided, how Ms X made the arrangements and whether other taxi firms could be explored. The Council highlighted if it arranged a private taxi, it was likely to encounter the same issues Ms X had.
19. Within a week, the Council wrote to Ms X with the Stage Two outcome. It explained in detail how it previously considered her application, how it came to offer a personal budget and decided it correctly followed guidance and policy in her case. It outlined the key points discussed in the appeal. It recognised the difficulties Ms X faced but it was satisfied a reasonable offer had been made as the personal budget could facilitate safe taxi transport. It also noted minor administrative errors on decision letters, but it did not find evidence it affected the overall decision. It put in place measures to ensure thorough checks in the future.
20. In October 2024, Ms X complained to us. She also added concerns about the conduct of the Council officer in the Stage Two appeal.
21. In response to my enquiries, the Council accepted a lack of clarity in its communication and the lack of consent from Ms X to a personal travel budget. It was committed to providing training to appeal panels to ensure decisions made adhere to statutory guidance. It said it would contact Ms X to further discuss Y’s transport needs and arrange an alternative form of transport if required.
22. In May 2025, the Council wrote to Ms X confirming it had now arranged home to school transport for Y.

Analysis

Stage One appeal letter

23. The Council’s Stage One appeal response letter said it had no medical evidence to say why Y could not walk to school. This indicated it did not think Y was eligible for transport assistance.
24. However, Ms X did submit medical evidence with her appeal. Then, despite saying it had no evidence, the Council offered a personal budget. This was contradictory and the letter did not explain on what basis or the reasons why. This is not in line with statutory guidance (Paragraph 10) as it did not demonstrate how this decision was made.
25. In later records, the Council said it did consider Ms X’s medical evidence, discussed it internally, decided Y was eligible and explained why it thought the personal budget to be reasonable. But it should have included this in the first outcome letter to Ms X.
26. The faults above caused unnecessary confusion and frustration to Ms X. The Council also made some administrative errors. These minor errors on their own are not significant, but it is not good practice as details should be accurate. The Council accepted this and would do better checks in future. This is appropriate.

Conduct of the Stage Two appeal

27. Ms X said the Council officer was loud, intimidating with an aggressive tone in the Stage Two appeal, however this is not something I can make an objective assessment of in the absence of a recording. I have reviewed the contemporaneous notes of the appeal hearing. The Council responded to various points raised by Ms X with its own view, as it was entitled to, which read as professional. I recognise Ms X may have disagreed with the responses or felt them to be dismissive, but I have not seen further supporting evidence of anything inappropriate. Ms X said her advocate was silenced but I can see they were both able to put their views across, so this does not appear to be the case. I do not find evidence of any significant concerns on the overall conduct of the appeal.
28. I recognise the Council did not appear to take on board Ms X’s advocate’s relevant points, but in my view, this relates more to the later decision-making process itself, which I explore further below.

Personal budget

29. The Council later agreed Y was eligible for transport assistance. The Council must provide actual transport unless a parent consents to an alternative. There is no evidence the Council had Ms X’s agreement before deciding they should have a personal travel budget. This is not in line with statutory guidance (Paragraph 9). Ms X also indicated she was not interested in this in the application form. This is fault. A personal budget for transport is voluntary.
30. The Council did consider Ms X’s use of the personal budget and difficulties experienced with the private taxis in detail, as evidenced by the thorough Stage Two appeal letter. However, it concluded even if the Council arranged it, it was likely to experience similar issues. But in my view, that was beside the point in the overall picture. Ms X did not consent to the personal budget, and when she tried it, she was unable to use it to arrange suitable transport, so the responsibility fell back onto the Council to make provision. It should have done this much sooner than it did, had it properly considered the statutory guidance at the start and throughout the process. This is fault.

Injustice

31. In response to my enquiries, the Council has since agreed to offer home to school transport to Y. It is positive it acted in light of its faults. However, this does not remedy the significant distress and frustration caused to Ms X and the family prior to this, including the inconvenience and burden of transporting Y themselves which impacted on all of their wellbeing.

Back to top

Action

32. To remedy the injustice set out above, the Council has agreed to carry out the following actions:
33. Within one month of the final decision:
• Apologise to Ms X in writing (in line with our guidance on making an effective apology) for the injustice caused by the faults identified;
• Pay Ms X a symbolic payment of £300 to recognise the frustration, inconvenience, and distress caused; and
• If Ms X did not make use of the funds from the personal budget the Council originally offered, it should make a payment to Ms X to reflect their costs of transporting Y to and from school themselves since mid-September 2024 up to May 2025. This could be based on the mileage allowance the Council normally pays (or HMRC rates if the Council does not have its own policy).
34. Within three months of the final decision:
• The Council should send written reminders to relevant staff of the requirement to seek an applicant’s consent before providing a personal travel budget for children or young people eligible for school transport assistance; and
• The Council should arrange the training it said it would for appeal panel members to ensure decisions made adhere to statutory travel to school guidance.
35. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

36. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations to remedy the injustice. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman