Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to withdraw school transport assistance for Mrs X’s daughter. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council has withdrawn free school transport for her daughter with six weeks’ notice. She says the Council previously provided school transport from her son from the same address. Mrs X is also concerned that:
• It is unfair her daughter must walk almost three miles to school in all weathers; and
• The walking route is unsafe.

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. 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)

6. 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.
7. 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 based on the circumstances of each case.
8. 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)

What happened

9. The Council awarded Mrs X’s son free school transport because the home to school distance was more than three miles and the walking route was considered unsafe.
10. In 2021 Mrs X and her family moved home. The Council assessed the new home to school address as more than three miles. Her son was therefore considered eligible under the criteria and the Council again provided free school transport.
11. When her daughter started the same school in 2022, the Council awarded her free school transport based on the previous assessment for her brother. Mrs X’s son has now left school.
12. In 2025, the Council discovered the distance from Mrs X home to school is less than three miles. Therefore the previous award for her son and daughter were based on incorrect information.
13. The Council’s Home to school transport policy says:

“In the event that the Authority has provided assistance with transport in error, the provision will be withdrawn following a six week notice period.”

14. The Council discovered the distance from Mrs X’s home to the school is less that three miles. It also reviewed the walking route in 2021 and determined it as safe.
15. In line with the published policy the Council gave six weeks’ notice before withdrawing school transport assistance for Mrs X’s daughter.
16. I understand Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decision and says she previously won an appeal and was awarded free school transport for her son because the walking route was unsafe. However, this was from a previous address.
17. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means it is not our role to take a second look at a decision not to provide school transport to decide if it was right or wrong. We are also not here to substitute the Council’s opinion for our own when it comes to matters such as what is a safe walking route to school.
18. Instead, we look at the processes a council followed to make its decisions. We cannot question whether the decision is right or wrong if the Council followed the right process. If we consider the Council considered the relevant law and guidance, we cannot question the merits of the decision, regardless of whether a complainant disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

19. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence that the Council failed to follow the correct procedures before deciding to withdraw school transport for Mrs X’s daughter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman