Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to withdraw school transport for Mr X’s child following a new walking route becoming available. We have not seen evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to withdraw school transport for his son and others. He says the newly available walking route is dangerous.

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 Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. 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.
6. Based on the evidence I have seen, the Council followed the proper process to consider Mr X’s appeal which was heard as a group appeal. This is because the withdrawal of school transport affected several children in the village.
7. The Appeals Committee (the committee) met in January. It considered all the information available. It decided to defer the decision until the Committee Members had walked the new route themselves.
8. The initial plan was for Members to walk the route once roadworks and road closures in the area were completed. However, the Council was advised the roadworks were not due to be completed for some months, with further roadworks planned in the summer. The Council sought legal advice. The Committee was advised to walk the route as soon as possible.
9. Members walked the route. The report of this states Members considered the Government guidance on home to school travel and guidance from Road Safety Great Britain and the Royal Society for Prevention of Accidents on walked routes to school. The Committee decided the route was available for a child accompanied by an adult as necessary to walk to school in reasonable safety.
10. The Council notified Mr X of its decision that it will withdraw school transport from the village. It gave him three weeks’ notice to make alternative travel arrangements for his son.
11. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision and believes the route is not safe. However, there is no evidence of fault in how the Council made its final decision and I therefore cannot question whether it was right or wrong.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision to withdraw home to school transport for his son.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman