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 the Council has refused to provide her child (Y) with free transport to school. Miss X says the Council has not properly considered her child’s needs.

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

School transport

5. The Department for Education has produced statutory guidance for Councils to help understand their duties regarding school transport. The Guidance states councils have a duty to provide free transport to eligible children who attend their nearest suitable school and:
• live more than the statutory walking distance from that school, or
• who live within statutory walking distance of the school but who cannot reasonably be expected to walk to that school because of their special educational needs, disability, or mobility problem (even if accompanied by their parent), or
• who live within walking distance of the school but would not be able to walk to that school in reasonable safety, even if they were accompanied by their parent.
6. The Guidance states a child will not normally be eligible solely because their parent’s work commitment or caring responsibilities mean they are unable to accompany their child to school.
7. Councils should have an appeals process for parents to challenge decisions about home to school transport.

Background

8. Miss X asked the Council to provide Y with free transport to school. Y has Special Educational Needs (SEN) and an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan). The Council refused Miss X’s application. The Council said the distance from her home to Y’s school was within the statutory walking distance and there were no other reasons to provide transport.
9. Miss X appealed the Council’s decision. She explained Y’s SEN made it difficult for them to walk to school. Y received Disability Living Expenditure (DLA) but Miss X did not have access to a car. Miss X attended college and relied on a neighbour to help take Y to school. Miss X raised concerns about the distance and safety of the walk to school.
10. An independent panel considered Miss X’s appeal at the final stage of the Council’s appeals process. The panel considered the information from Miss X and the Council – including Y’s EHC Plan. The panel decided the Council had properly considered the original application and there were no grounds to make an exception to the Council’s policy.

Assessment

11. We will not start an investigation into Miss X’s complaint.
12. 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.
13. In this case, the Council has followed the proper process to consider Miss X’s application and appeals. Miss X had a chance to take part in the appeals process and the stage 2 panel considered all the information presented. The panel wrote to Miss X and explained its decision. While I understand Miss X is disappointed with the panel’s decision there is not enough evidence of fault in how it was reached for us to become involved.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman