Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to refuse school transport for his three children. He says the Council has failed to consider the health diagnosis of each child. We found the Council at fault, which caused Mr X injustice. The Council has agreed to reconsider the appeal, make payment to recognise the injustice and apologise to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse school transport for his three children. He says that each child has autism and global development delays. Mr X reports the Council has failed to consider this in its review of his school transport application.
2. Mr X says that this has impacted both him and his family by causing distress in the form of stress and disruption to his family. He has often had to pay for a taxi for his children to arrive at school safely.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)
5. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance. Mr X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
7. I have also considered the relevant statutory guidance, as set out below. In addition, I have considered the Ombudsman’s published guidance on remedies.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

8. Local authorities must make suitable home to school travel arrangements as they consider necessary for ‘eligible children’ of compulsory school age to attend their ‘qualifying school’. The travel arrangements must be made and provided free of charge. The relevant qualifying school is the nearest school with places available that provides education appropriate to the age, ability and aptitude of the child, and any special educational needs the child may have. ‘Eligible children’ include:

• children living outside ‘statutory walking distance’ from the school (two miles for children under eight, three miles for children aged eight and above);
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot reasonably be expected to walk to school because of their special educational needs, disability or mobility problem;
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot walk to school because the route is unsafe; and
• children entitled on low-income grounds. (Education Act 1996, 508B(1) and Schedule 35B)

9. A child will not normally be eligible for free travel to school on the grounds of their special educational needs, disability, or mobility problem, or on the grounds that the route is unsafe, if they would be able to walk to school if they were accompanied.
10. A child will not normally be eligible solely because their parent’s work commitments or caring responsibilities mean they are unable to accompany their child themselves. Councils must consider cases where the parent says there are good reasons why they are unable to accompany their child, or make other suitable arrangements for their journey, and make a decision on the basis of the circumstances of each case.
11. Where the local authority determines that a child would be able to walk if they were accompanied, the general expectation is that the parent will accompany them or make other suitable arrangements for their journey to and from school. (Department of Education, Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance 2023, paragraphs 47 to 52)
12. Councils should have an appeals process in place for parents who wish to appeal about the eligibility of their child for travel support.
13. The statutory guidance recommends councils adopt the following appeals process:

• Stage 1: review by a senior officer. Within 20 working days of receiving a parent’s written request to appeal the decision, a senior officer reviews the original decision and sends the parent a detailed written notification of the outcome of the review setting out the nature of the decision, how the review was conducted, what was taken into account, the rationale for the decision reached, and how to escalate their case to stage 2; and
• Stage 2: Within 40 working days of receipt of the parent’s request for an independent appeal panel to consider written and verbal representations, a detailed decision is sent setting out: the nature of the decision reached; how the review was conducted; what factors were considered; the rationale for the decision reached; and information about appealing to us.
  (Department of Education, Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance 2023, Part 5)

What happened

14. Mr X applied for school transport for his three children in June 2024. In the same month, the Council rejected his application because the school was less than one mile away from Mr X’s home. The Council also wrote the evidence suggested no physical or medical needs from the children which prevented travel with an adult.
15. Mr X appealed the Council’s decision in July 2024, and the Council produced its stage one appeal response within the same month. The Council rejected the application for the same reasons.
16. Mr X further appealed the Council’s decision in August 2024. Mr X explained he did not feel the Council had considered the specific needs of his children and the fact their additional needs meant they could not use public transport. Also, that their behaviour was highly unpredictable, so it was not possible to get them to and from school without transport support.
17. The Council issued a stage two outcome letter in October 2024 (within its deadline). Again, it rejected Mr X’s application for the same reasons stated, however this letter did not set out what the Council had considered when reaching its decision or its view on Mr X’s specific points of appeal.

Analysis

18. As part of the appeal’s process, the Council is required to provide a detailed decision setting out the nature of how it reached this conclusion. From a review of the stage two response, there is no clear rationale provided from the Council, on the evidence it reviewed and how this relates to the decision made.
19. For example, there is no clear evidence to support that it considered each’s child Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan. The evidence reads as if it has only considered one child’s application. I consider this to be fault by the Council.
20. It has impacted Mr X by causing him avoidable distress in the form of frustration and by feeling the Council was not treating him fairly. I therefore find the Council should reconsider the appeal and provide full rationale for its following decision.
21. The Council should apologise to Mr X for the distress it has caused him, and it should also provide him with an award in recognition of its handling of his application.
22. I note that Mr X has sought compensation for costs he has incurred because of this issue. However, the Ombudsman cannot decide on whether to award school transport on behalf of the Council. It remains the Council's responsibility to review the application and provide a detailed response about this. The award made is a recognition therefore in the way the Council has handled the application and appeal’s process.
23. The Council has committed to improving its appeal’s process in a previous decision the Ombudsman has made, and therefore I have not made any service improvements in this decision.

Back to top

Action

24. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Provide a written apology to Mr X for the unnecessary and avoidable distress caused by the failure to fully consider and explain its decision about school transport. This apology should be in line with our guidance on making an effective apology
2. Pay Mr X £150 for the distress and inconvenience this matter caused.
3. Confirm in writing that it will re-consider Mr X’s stage 2 appeal and provide full and detailed rationale for its following decision.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

26. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise, reconsider the appeal and make payment to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman