Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discontinue taxi travel to school for Mrs X’s child. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X said the Council wrongly declined to continue to provide taxi transport to school for her child.

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

My assessment

5. We do not function as a supplementary right of appeal, and will only find fault where the Council has failed to follow guidance or to properly consider the case a parent has put forward in an appeal.
6. Mrs X’s case for the continuation of taxi transport was that her child could not cope with public transport and the taxi ensured the child’s school attendance. However, the Council’s refusal took into account national guidance, the evidence presented by Mrs X, and that gathered by its own assessor. Investigation by us would be unlikely to find the Council failed to follow the correct process for reaching its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our further involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman