Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (25 003 463)

Category : Education > School transport

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 02 Sep 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the school transport provision for Miss X’s child. It is unlikely that an investigation by us would add to the Council’s own investigation or lead to the outcome Miss X is seeking.

The complaint

  1. Miss X said a transport company failed to report a seizure her child had in a taxi on the way home from school. She wanted the Council to change the provider.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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:
  • any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
  • any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
  • we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
  • further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Miss X’s child’s risk assessment stated they could suffer seizures. On arrival home from school one afternoon, they were found to have had a seizure of a different type, and staff had assumed the child was sleeping.
  2. In response to Ms X’s complaint, the Council stated it would revise the child’s risk assessment, and that it had reminded the provider that all seizures must be reported. It did not see a need to seek a new provider, but offered Miss X a payment if she wished to make other travel arrangements. Were we to investigate, it is unlikely we would recommend more than that, or that we would recommend the Council sought a new provider.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because investigation by us would be unlikely to add to the Council’s own investigation, or to lead to the outcome she is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings