Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about home to school transport provided by the Council. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained about the home to school transport provided to her son (Y) who has an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan). Mrs X is unhappy the Council only provides transport at the end of the school day. Mrs X says this means Y cannot take part in school activities after the school day or at weekends. Mrs X says the Council has not properly considered its duties under the Equality Act.

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))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

7. Mrs X’s child (Y) receives free school transport from the Council. Mrs X asked the Council to provide transport which would allow Y to attend school activities after the end of the school day and at weekends. The Council refused because its policy is to only provide transport at the start and end of the school day.
8. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision. She said Y attended the only school that could meet his needs. It was only because of his SEN that Y required fee transport. Transport was too expensive for Mrs X to arrange and meant Y was missing out on essential after school activities. Mrs X said the Council’s policy appeared to violate the Equality Act by indirectly discriminating against disabled students.
9. An independent panel considered Mrs X’s appeal at the final stage of the Council’s process. The panel noted the Council’s policy was to only provide transport at the end of the school day. The Council believed it had not breached its duty under the Equality Act as there was no requirement to provide transport outside the school day. It was also not included in Y’s EHC Plan. The panel decided the transport provided met the Council’s legal requirements and there were no exceptional circumstances warranting different transport.

Assessment

10. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision.
11. Having reviewed the evidence available, we will not start an investigation into Mrs X’s complaint.
12. Based on the evidence I have seen the Council’s original decision was in line with its published policy. Also, statutory guidance on home to school transport clearly states councils are not required to make arrangements for children to attend extra-curricular activities and other commitments outside school hours.
13. The Council then followed the proper process to consider Mrs X’s appeal. The panel considered all the information available when it reached its decision.
14. There is no fault in how the Council took its final decision and I therefore cannot question whether it was right or wrong. An investigation is not therefore appropriate.
15. We also cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.
16. The Council has considered the Equality Act issues raised by Mrs X and explained its decision. While I understand Mrs X is disappointed, there is not enough evidence the Council has not properly considered this issue to warrant us investigating. If Mrs X believes the Council has discriminated against her then she should take legal advice about the options available to her.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman