Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Councils appeal process for free home to school transport. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice by apologising and taking action to improve its services.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council took too long to complete its school transport appeals process.
2. Mrs X complained the delays meant she incurred costs getting Y to school. This caused stress and impacted hers and her husband work.
3. Mrs X complained the walking route to school her son needs to take should be reclassed as hazardous.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
5. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mrs X applied for free secondary school transport for her child, Y. The Council refused the application. It said that her child, Y did not meet the criteria for free transport, as set out in its policy as Y’s home address was less than 3 miles away from the school.
9. Mrs X appealed the decision in June 2023 saying that there were exceptional circumstances and that the route was unsafe for Y to walk to school. Furthermore, she was unable to get Y and his brother, who is at primary, to school on time.
10. The Council did not uphold the appeal. It said its policy had been applied correctly and a recent road safety assessment by a road safety officer had said the route was safe to walk when accompanied by an adult.
11. Mrs X asked for the case to be considered by the appeals committee and provided additional information and evidence. This included reasons the route, in her opinion, was not safe and highlighted neighbours’ children received free school transport.
12. Mrs X says appeal hearing dates were set for November 2023 and January 2024, but these did not happen.
13. Mrs X says she didn’t hear from the Council about her appeal until July 2024 and was only given 3 days’ notice. She was unable to attend but agreed for the Council to hold the appeal to avoid further delays.
14. The appeal was held and used the written information provided by Mrs X in September 2023, Road safety officer reports and inspections from November 2023 and May 2024.
15. The appeal was not upheld. The Council wrote to Mrs X and explained its decision. It said the policy was correctly applied and there were no exceptional circumstances in her case.
16. We are not an appeal body. Unless there was fault in the decision-making process, we cannot comment on the decision reached. In this case, there is insufficient evidence of fault in the decision-making process to justify further investigation with regards to this part of the complaint.
17. We asked the Council the reasons for the significant delay in Mrs X appeal process and it advised that it was caused by staff sickness, It also said it had updated its website to advise that appeals requiring reports to be gathered, may take longer.
18. If we investigated this complaint, it is likely we would find the Council at fault because there was a significant delay in its appeals process for Mrs X case.
• Statutory guidance says stage 2 appeals should be heard within 40 working days of a parent notifying the Council they wish to escalate their appeal.
• According to its own guidance, appeals are heard once a month dependant on demand. Regardless of staff absence, at least 6 other appeal hearings could have been held for Mrs X case after the initial cancellation in November 2023. This delay caused Mrs X frustration and uncertainty.

19. We therefore asked the Council to consider remedying this by taking the action set out below.

Agreed Action

20. Within 1 month of this decision, the Council will write to Mrs X and apologise for the frustration and uncertainty caused by the delays in the appeal process. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
21. Within two months of this decision, the Council will put in place a suitable process that mitigates against staff absence which causes delays to school transport appeals.
22. The Council will provide to the Ombudsman evidence of the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

23. We have upheld this complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman