Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide the complainant’s child with home to school transport. This is because there is inadequate evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s decision to provide her child with a bus pass and travel training to get to school. She wants the Council to provide transport to take her child to school.

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 impact 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 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The evidence shows the Council has applied its school transport policy and has explained its decision to provide a bus pass and travel training.
6. The Council’s responses to Ms X’s appeal confirms it has reviewed all the information she provided. It also shows the panel members asked questions at the appeal hearing.
7. It notes both parents live at home and only one is working. The family has a car but this incurs a clean air charge if used to travel to school. The panel also noted government guidance says “the general expectation is that the parent will accompany them or make other suitable arrangements for their journey to and from school. A child will not normally be eligible solely because of their parents work commitments or caring responsibilities.”
8. The role of the appeal panel was to consider whether the previous decisions were correct and, if so, whether there were exceptional circumstances to justify awarding a transport vehicle. The minutes of the appeal panel hearing and its decision letter shows that it did so.
9. We are not an appeal body. Our role is to consider whether there was fault in the way the Council considered Ms X’s application for alternative school transport for her child. We have not seen such evidence. Therefore we cannot criticise the decision to refuse the appeal or intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision not to award alternative school transport for her child.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman