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

The complaint

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

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

How 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. Ms X’s son has an Education Health and Care plan and attends college. Ms X says he has previously qualified for school transport assistance, which she has elected to take in the form of a fuel allowance.
6. The Council refused Ms X’s most recent application for post-16 school transport assistance. Ms X used her right to pursue the matter through the two stages of the Council’s appeal process but was unsuccessful.
7. Ms X believes the Council’s decision to refuse the appeal is flawed. She told the Council that her son’s needs are such that he cannot travel to college independently, and that she believes his entitlement to transport assistance should continue.
8. 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 Ms X’s son qualifies for post-16 school transport assistance or, if not, whether his circumstances are so exceptional as to warrant upholding her appeal. Those were matters 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.
9. The case documents show that Ms X was given the opportunity to make representations and provide evidence for the panel to consider. She attended the appeal hearing in person and was able to make her case. 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 the panel to make.
10. Ms 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 Ms 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