Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the decision to refuse the complainant’s appeal against the type of home to school transport awarded for her son. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains that the Council has made a flawed decision to refuse her appeal against the type of school transport awarded for her son.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X’s son has been awarded home to school transport assistance. The Council initially provided him with individual taxi transport, which Miss X says met his needs. It subsequently changed the arrangement to the provision of a seat on shared transport.
6. Miss X says the new transport arrangement is not appropriate for her son. She says it has negatively affected his mental health and his attendance at school. She believes the Council should reinstate the previous arrangement and has appealed for the provision of individual taxi transport for her son.
7. The matter went to the school transport appeal panel, which refused the appeal. Miss X believes the panel failed to properly consider her son’s needs and that the decision to refuse the appeal was wrong.
8. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part. It is not for the Ombudsman to take a view on whether Miss X’s son’s circumstances are so exceptional as to warrant awarding individual taxi transport. That is for the appeal panel. The question for the Ombudsman is whether there is evidence of significant fault in the way the panel considered the matter and, if so, whether that had a demonstrable effect on the outcome. There is no such evidence.
9. The correspondence Miss X has provided shows that she was given the opportunity to attend the appeal panel meeting in person and to provide evidence for the panel to consider. The weight the panel members gave to the case she made was a matter for their professional judgement. Having considered the evidence, the decision was for them to make.
10. Miss X disagrees with the panel’s decision but there is no evidence of fault in the way the panel members used their judgement. That being the case, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision or intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman