Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide Miss X’s child with free transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, complained about the Council’s decision not to provide her child (Y) with free transport to school. The Council has refused Miss X’s request because Y is not of compulsory school age. The Council says this means there is no entitlement to free transport. The Council has instead offered discretionary transport which requires a parental contribution. Miss X says the Council has not properly considered her case and that its policy is discriminatory against young children with special educational needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)

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. Councils are required to make travel arrangements for “eligible children” of compulsory school age to attend their “nearest suitable school”. Councils also have discretionary powers to provide transport assistance to children not eligible for free transport. The Department for Education has published statutory guidance for councils to help understand their duties relating to school transport.
6. 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 a complainant disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
7. In this case, the Council has refused Miss X’s request for free transport because Y is not yet of compulsory school age. While I understand Miss X’s frustrations, that is a decision the Council is entitled to take. Y cannot be an eligible child in this case because they are not of compulsory school age. Also, Y does have an EHC Plan, but there is nothing in it which says the Council must provide transport. The Council’s decision is in line with legislation and its own policy. The Council has explained its decision and in the absence of fault in how it was reached it is not one we can question.
8. As explained in paragraph 5, the Council does have discretion to provide transport to children it does not consider eligible. The Council has offered transport, but it requires a parental contribution from Miss X. Again, that is a decision the Council is entitled to take. While I know Miss X disagrees with the Council’s position, without fault in how it was reached, we cannot intervene to substitute an alternative view. An investigation is not therefore warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman