Summary: Mrs B complained that the Council had failed to properly consider its statutory duty to provide transport to her son C without requiring her to accompany him. We agreed with the Council’s view that it did not consider the appeal properly and welcome its offer of £500 to Mrs B for her inconvenience. The Council has also agreed to apologise to her and provide guidance to appeal panels on the Council’s statutory duties.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complained that Wokingham Borough Council (the Council), in considering her appeal for school transport for her son, B, failed to acknowledge it is responsible for providing transport for him as an eligible child, without requiring a parent to accompany him. This has caused Mrs B distress and inconvenience as she cannot accompany him to school.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs B and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mrs B 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

School transport - Arrangements for eligible children

6. 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)

What happened

7. Mrs B’s son, C is under eight years old and attends the nearest qualifying school, more than two miles from his home. Mrs B applied for transport for C to get to and from school for the school year 2024/25. The Council provided Mrs B and C with a bus pass.
8. Mrs B appealed saying this was unreasonable. She has another young child. The journey to school involves two buses each way, taking over an hour each way and was too tiring for C. She was paying for a taxi, but this was too expensive and C’s attendance at school had decreased significantly.
9. The Council considered the appeal at stage one of its procedure. It refused the appeal on 4 October 2024. It noted the bus route Mrs B had suggested took 53 minutes which was in excess of the 45 minutes recommended in the Council’s policy. The Council identified an alternative route involving one bus and a 37 minute walk, making a journey of 47 minutes. It said the walk was less than two miles which as the statutory limit for children under eight and considered it was a reasonable option. It said it had no other taxis going to the school so to provide one just for C would be too expensive and a bus pass for her and C was the most efficient use of resources.
10. Mrs B escalated her appeal to stage two of the Council’s appeals procedure. The Council held an independent panel hearing on 10 December 2024. Mr B attended the hearing and explained why he considered transport was necessary and bus pass was unreasonable. The Panel considered the Council’s case: the 47 minute journey was reasonable and the most cost-effective, children under the age of 8 are expected to walk up to two miles without travel assistance, walking would not have a negative effect on C’s mental health and C would be eight in a few months so would not then be eligible for transport.
11. The Panel refused the appeal. It said that while it was sympathetic to the family’s circumstances it concluded that travel assistance in the provision of bus passes was a suitable arrangement.
12. The notes of the hearing under the reasons for the decision say that it is the parent’s responsibility to take children to school.
13. Mrs B complained to us.
14. In response to my enquiries the Council has acknowledged that:
• as an eligible child, it is the Council’s responsibility to provide suitable transport for C without reliance on a parent;
• offering a bus pass to Mrs B as well as C indicates a reliance on parental accompaniment;
• the route to C’s school included elements that may not be suitable for a child of his age to navigate independently;
• the decision on C’s transport should have been based on consideration of the suitability of the route for C to navigate independently; and
• the appeal panel may not have properly applied the statutory guidance and duties.
15. It said it was reviewing the case and will take steps to provide suitable transport for C without relying on parental accompaniment. It also offered Mrs B £500 in recognition of her inconvenience.

Analysis

16. I agree with the Council that the offer of the bus pass to both Mrs B and C implies that the route is only suitable if she accompanies C to school and that this was not in accordance with the law and statutory guidance.
17. I welcome the offer to review the case and offer Mrs B £500. As C is now 8 years old, if he remains at his current school, he will no longer be an eligible child and so any change of decision on the provision of transport will be of no benefit. However I consider the offer of £500 is reasonable and in line with our Guidance on Remedies.

Back to top

Action

18. I recommended within one month of the date of my final decision that the Council:
• apologises to Mrs B and pays her £500; and
• provides guidance to appeal panels on the statutory duty of the Council to provide transport to eligible children without relying on parental accompaniment.
19. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

20. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman