Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council had failed to provide a reliable escort to take her disabled son to school, as required. The Council has investigated the complaints and accepted fault. We agree with the Council’s findings, but we considered that there should be a symbolic payment to recognise the avoidable distress and inconvenience caused to the family. The Council has agreed to this. We are therefore closing the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the disruption to her son’s (Y’s) home to school transport arrangements. In particular,

• in January 2025 Mrs X’s mother had to escort Y to school because the usual escort was unavailable but then she found herself looking after another child. While there was no incident during the trip (other than what the other child is alleged to have said), Mrs X is very concerned about the use of a person with no safeguarding checks having been undertaken;
• the escort service between September 2024 and April 2025 was unreliable with Mrs X, her partner and her mother having to step in on a number of occasions to escort Y to school. Mrs X considers other parents/carers may have had the same experiences in breach of the Equality Act; and
• there was poor communication and handling of her complaints.

2. Mrs X says that Y was caused avoidable anxiety and distress, particularly severe because he was starting at a new school. Mrs X also says that the poor management of the escort service has caused avoidable distress and inconvenience to the family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. We also investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘service failure’. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), as amended).
5. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It offers protection, in employment, education, the provision of goods and services, housing, transport and the carrying out of public functions.
6. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics (disability being one of them) listed in the Equality Act 2010.
7. We cannot decide if a council has breached the Equality Act. Only a court can do this. But we can decide whether a council has taken account of an individual’s rights.
8. 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(1), as amended).
9. 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

What I have and have not investigated

10. I have investigated the specific complaint of January 2025 and Mrs X’s concerns about the unreliability of the escort service between September 2024 and April 2025. Since that date, Mrs X says that the Council has provided a reliable escort for Y.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I considered evidence provided by the Council and by Mrs X as well as relevant law, policy and guidance. I spoke to Mrs X on the telephone and sought the Council’s comments and Mrs X’s views.
12. I issued a draft decision statement to Mrs X and to the Council. I have taken into account their comments before reaching my final decision.
13. The Council carried out an investigation under its two stage corporate complaints procedure. Its final two stage complaint response of February 2025 accepted that the escort service for Y and its communication with Mrs X had been poor.

Back to top

What I found: Legal considerations

14. Councils must make suitable home to school travel arrangements as they consider necessary for ‘eligible children’ of compulsory school age. For travel arrangements to be suitable, they must also be safe and reasonably stress free and enable the child to arrive at school ready for a day of study.
15. Where an escort is required, councils need to provide suitably trained escorts, and they must have safety checks by the Disclosure and Barring (DBS).

Back to top

Key facts: Complaint (1)

16. Y was diagnosed with an autistic spectrum condition (ASC) in 2016. He is non-verbal and has difficulties in all aspects of language, understanding and communication. He can exhibit significant behaviours when routine and structures are changed. Mrs X has two other school age children.
17. Y started at a special independent school in September 2024. He is an ‘eligible’ child for school transport, and he is taken to school in a taxi with an escort. Mrs X says that initially Y travelled alone in the taxi with an escort. But another pupil joined the taxi whom initially the Council said did not require an escort. But subsequently Mrs X says that the Council decided this pupil did need an escort.
18. The Council says it has a small pool of trained escorts and relief escorts, who can take pupils to school when a permanent escort is unavailable. It seems that the Council has had problems in securing a good supply of regular escorts. All escorts undergo safeguarding checks and enhanced Disclosure and Barring Certificates.
19. In January 2025, Y’s escort was unavailable. There was no relief escort available. The Council had very short notice of the escort’s unavailability. So, rather than cancel the transport, the Council asked Mrs X if her mother could escort Y, to which she agreed, and this happened on a return trip from school and the next day when taking Y to school.
20. Mrs X says that she made it clear that she did not agree to her mother escorting any other pupil. However, on the above trips, there was the other pupil in the taxi and Mrs X’s mother had been unaware that she would also be escorting this pupil. The Council says that this pupil sat in the front with the driver.
21. But Mrs X disputes this, saying that this pupil sat in the back with Mrs X’s mother and Y. Therefore, her mother was responsible for both. Mrs X says that the other pupil made inappropriate comments and disclosures which were distressing to Mrs X’s mother.
22. Mrs X’s concern is that the Council allowed Mrs X’s mother to escort another pupil without having the proper safeguarding checks. She considers that this is a serious failing.
23. Mrs X made a formal complaint to the Council. She was dissatisfied with the stage one of the Council’s corporate complaints’ process because the Council failed, among other things, to recognise the safeguarding and equality issues. Mrs X asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage two.
24. As a remedy, Mrs X asked for an apology and explanation about how the incident happened, confirmation of the safeguarding policies and the measures which the Council intended to take to ensure there was no repeat.
25. In the Council’s stage two complaint response of February 2025 to Mrs X, it acknowledged what had happened in January. It said that there had been a few occasions when a parent/carer had said that they were willing to accompany another pupil when accompanying their own child. So, this might have happened occasionally but only with the families’ consent.
26. The Council explained that it had had very short notice of the escort’s unavailability for Y and therefore Mrs X was asked if her mother could step in. But it was not expected that her mother would ‘escort’ the other pupil. Therefore, the Council had misinformed Mrs X, and it apologised for this, recognising that this was unacceptable.
27. The Council said that the other pupil’s comments had been considered and it recognised how distressing these were for Mrs X’s mother.
28. The Council also said that it was working hard to ensure disruptions to the service did not recur and that recruitment of escorts was a main priority.

Complaint (2):

29. Regarding the escort service between September 2024 and April 2025, Mrs X says that Y had a series of different escorts. She also says that her mother escorted Y on seventeen occasions because of the unavailability of an escort. Mrs X says that she also took Y to school to prevent him missing school on eleven occasions.
30. On these above occasions, Mrs X has confirmed that the Council asked them to step in which she and her mother agreed to. This was to ensure Y went to school. However, this created significant difficulties for Mrs X given she has two other school age children and created difficulties for her and her partner’s employment. Mrs X says that she felt the Council showed little concern about their predicament and she had to approach senior management and make a complaint
31. Mrs X also says that Y has had difficulty in coping with the constant change in the escort arrangement. It was the start of a new school, and he was often arriving at school unsettled and distressed.
32. Now that the Council has provided a regular escort since April 2025, Mrs X has noticed that this has helped Y’s attendance at school, and he is arriving less distressed.
33. Mrs X thinks that other parents/carers may have experienced the same poor service. She considers that the Council has not done enough to protect the rights of disabled pupils in breach of the Equality Act. Community and safe transport are particularly important for pupils with special needs and disabilities.
34. The Council says that it fully accepts the need to provide safe transport for pupils with special needs and disability. It says that the recruitment of escorts is challenging because of the nature of the role, requiring a split shift work pattern, and also the time it takes to undertake DBS recruitment checks.

Complaint (3):

35. Mrs X had raised concerns about the escort service prior to January 2025, but she felt that these concerns were not taken seriously. When she made a formal complaint, the Council has accepted the initial response was not in keeping with its customer service standards and it apologised. The Council stated it would be raising with staff the need to adhere to customer standards.

Findings: Complaint (1): January 2025 incident

36. The stage two complaint response of February 2025 was detailed and reassuring, and I consider fully addressed Mrs X’s complaints. In addition, the Council readily accepted it was at fault and, while there were no serious consequences, it recognised that no parent/carer should be escorting another pupil and Mrs X’s mother had been caused distress.
37. I am also satisfied that this was a one-off incident, and the Council took action to prevent a recurrence.
38. I endorse the Council’s findings, and I find that there has been fault causing injustice, as claimed by Mrs X.

Complaint (2): unreliability of escort service

39. It is clear from the Council’s stage two complaint response that it recognises it has a statutory duty to provide reliable and safe ‘home to school’ transport for eligible pupils. On the balance of probability, it is also likely other parents/carers may have experienced the same difficulties as Mrs X has.
40. But it seems that the problem arises because of the Council’s difficulty in recruiting sufficient escorts to enable it to provide a regular service to parents and their eligible children. The Council also says that The Council recognised that this was a problem. It is not clear when this became apparent and whether it was because of Mrs X’s complaint or before. But, whatever, the Council has taken action to improve its recruitment, with some success, given Y now has a reliable and regular escort.
41. I consider that the lack of suitable escorts, and the problems which Mrs X and Y experienced, is a result of a ‘service failure’ rather than the Council not recognising its statutory duties to provide safe and suitable transport. I consider that the Council’s difficulties in recruitment have entailed circumstances outside its control.
42. I recognise, however, that whatever the cause, the above failure has caused an injustice to Mrs X and Y, in the way she has described.

Complaint (3): poor communication

43. The Council recognised that its initial response of February 2025 to Mrs X was inadequate, and the language and tone was inappropriate. At stage two, the Council apologised for this and explained the action it was taking to improve customer service.

Back to top

Action

44. The Council has met Mrs X’s requested remedy when she raised her complaint in January 2025. It has apologised, explained what happened, and also what it intended to do to improve the escort service and customer standards. And I am satisfied the Council takes its duty to provide safe and suitable school transport for eligible pupils seriously and recognises how important it is for them to arrive at school in the right frame of mind.
45. Our primary aim is to put people back in the position they would have been in if the fault by the council had not occurred.
46. When this is not possible, we may recommend the council makes a symbolic payment. Where that takes the form of a payment, it is often a modest amount whose value is intended to be largely symbolic rather than purely financial. We also support organisational learning and improvements to help others.
47. We expect senior officers from councils to make effective, timely and specific apologies for the faults we have identified.
48. I consider that the Council has offered a suitable apology to Mrs X and undertaken service improvements to prevent a recurrence of the identified faults. But I consider that a small symbolic payment of £500 is required to recognise the avoidable distress to Y and to Mrs X and to recognise her and her mother’s time and trouble in having to step in to escort Y to school.
49. The Council has agreed to make this payment within one month of the final statement.
50. I am not recommending any service improvements because the Council has taken on board what needs to be improved.
51. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above action.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice and I recommended a remedy over and above the Council’s actions. The Council has agreed to this. Therefore, I am closing the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman