Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charges for post-16 school transport. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms X, complained about the amount charged for her son’s post-16 school transport. Ms X is unhappy that despite her son only accessing transport from February 2025, the Council is charging the full annual fee. Ms X says information from the Council is ambiguous and needs to be clearer.

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 the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Ms X asked the Council to provide her son with post-16 school transport. The Council originally refused, and Ms X appealed. The Council upheld Ms X’s appeal and offered her the chance to purchase a spare seat on an existing school transport service. The Council charged the full annual amount. It said “the total amount must be paid in full, regardless of whether the transport is used for a single day or an extended period.”
6. Ms X is unhappy with the Council’s position. Ms X referred to the Council’s original offer letter which said “[a student] may have to forfeit this seat during the academic year if the need arises…if this occurs the council will ensure you receive the balance of the contribution element for the period [the student] is unable to travel on the bus.” Ms X says this suggests flexibility in the payment. She says the Council has failed to show a section in its policy which states the contribution is fixed, regardless of usage.

Assessment

7. It is for the Council to decide its charging arrangements for school transport. We could only criticise the Council’s position if it had clearly deviated from a published policy or legislation.
8. Based on the evidence available there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council for us to investigate. The offer letter Ms X has quoted shows the Council will issue a refund if it needs to withdraw transport part way through the year. But that is a different situation to when a young person only accesses transport for part of the year due to other reasons – such as a late application, successful appeal, or a young person starting or leaving a course part way through. The Council’s position in these situations is set out in paragraph 5. In summary, parents or the young person are required to pay the full amount. This position aligns with the Council’s travel policy for young persons of sixth form age which says:

“If the Council agrees to provide travel assistance then its policy is to provide this in the form of a Personal Transport Budget (see Appendix 6) or a Travel Pass…The Birmingham City Council 16-18 Transport provision is a subsidised offer and the young person and / or his or her parents or carers will be required to contribute towards the cost of this…The amount that will be required is £1028 per academic year or £390 if the young person is from a low-income family. The payment is a contribution towards the cost of providing travel assistance and the Council will fund the balance.”

9. The above states how much the charge is and that parents / the young person are required to pay. The Council will then pay the balance. There is no reference to reduced charges for young people who only travel part way through the year. We could not therefore say the Council has failed to follow a published policy in such a way that warrants our involvement. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman