Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse the complainant’s application and appeal for school transport for her daughter. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains that the Council was at fault in refusing her application and appeal for school transport for her daughter.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

Pv20bHow I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X applied for school transport for her daughter to enable her to continue to attend the same school when the family moved. The Council applied its school transport policy and refused the application.
6. Miss X used her right to appeal against the refusal and has completed the appeal process. Her appeal was heard by the Council’s Education Transport Appeal Panel and was refused. Miss X complains that the decision was unfair, and that the Panel failed to properly consider her family’s circumstances.
7. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part. It is not for the Ombudsman to take a view on whether Miss X’s daughter’s circumstances are so exceptional as to warrant awarding school transport. That was a matter for the Appeal Panel. The question for the Ombudsman is whether there is evidence of significant fault in the way the Panel considered the matter and, if so, whether that had a demonstrable effect on the outcome. There is no such evidence.
8. The case documents show that Miss X was able to make written representations and provide supporting evidence for the Panel to consider. The weight the Panel members gave to the case she made was a matter for their professional judgement. Having considered the evidence, the decision was for them to make.
9. Miss X says the Council was wrong to assert that a place was available for her daughter at the school closest to her address. She says she, and her daughter’s current school, have been informed that this is not the case. However, the report of the Panel meeting shows that this matter was considered, and that the Council had ascertained that a space was available at that point. The evidence also shows that there are seven other schools closer to the family’s address than Miss X’s daughter’s school. In these circumstances, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the Panel for deciding it was not appropriate to uphold the appeal.
10. Miss X disagrees with the Panel’s decision to refuse her appeal but there is no evidence of fault in the way the Panel members used their judgement. That being the case, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision or intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman