Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the conduct of a school transport appeal provided by the Council. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X said the Council failed to adhere to its own transport policy or to apply the transport policy correctly to her child’s case when hearing her appeal against its refusal of free home-to school transport.

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 the complainant and read the Council’s policy for free home-to-school transport.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X’s complaint centres on the panel’s consideration of whether to exercise discretion to regard her child as an exceptional case. The child’s health had worsened, and they were no longer able to use a bus. The school attended was not the nearest, so there was no automatic right to transport provision.
6. We cannot decide if a child should qualify as an exceptional case. We can only say if the appeal hearing was properly conducted. That means adhering to policy and also considering the case put forward by Miss X that the circumstances were exceptional.
7. The panel’s decision letter refusing free transport laid out what Miss X had said and stated that it did not see grounds to exercise discretion. Although she said it should not have referred to her ability to transport her child to school because it was not listed in the Council’s transport policy, she had raised this, so it would be expected to consider it. The letter does not suggest the panel operated a blanket policy of refusal, but that it considered the potential exercise of discretion. That another panel might have reached a more sympathetic view of the circumstances would not be likely to equate to fault by the panel that considered Miss X’s appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the transport appeal decision was reached to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman