Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to consider Mr X’s appeal against its refusal of free school transport. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision not to accept the appeal to warrant investigation by us.

The complaint

1. Mr X said the Council wrongly refused to provide free home-to-school transport for his child and then refused to consider his appeal against that decision.

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 considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Whether Mr X’s child should receive free home-to-school transport is a matter for an appeal where a council refuses it. We cannot act as a substitute.
5. In this case, the correspondence I have seen shows the Council set a deadline for appeals in accordance with government guidance, which it could do. The Council said it had not received an appeal from Mr X. Mr X could not provide evidence to the Council that he sent an appeal within the deadline. Given that, investigation by us would be unlikely to lead to a finding of fault by the Council in operating the appeal process.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council operated the appeal process to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman