Summary: The Council is at fault for failing to make the correct decision at the stage one appeal and failing to provide Ms X’s child with school transport. The Council should apologise to Ms X and make a payment for the financial injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council wrongly refused her application for free home-school transport for her child (Y) who has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. Ms X said the Council delayed dealing with her application. Ms X’s stage two appeal was successful. She would like the Council to pay her back for the transport costs she has paid.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)
4. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance and our guidance on remedies published on our website.
6. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation

Travel arrangements for eligible children

7. 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).

Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans

8. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This document sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. The EHC Plan is set out in sections. We cannot direct changes to the sections about their needs, education, or the name of the educational placement. Only the special educational needs tribunal or the council can do this. Section I sets out the name and/or type of school.

Transport appeals

9. Councils should have an appeals process in place for parents who wish to appeal about the eligibility of their child for travel support.
10. The statutory guidance recommends councils adopt the following appeals process:

• Stage 1: review by a senior officer. Within 20 working days of receiving a parent’s written request to appeal the decision, a senior officer reviews the original decision and sends the parent a detailed written notification of the outcome of the review setting out the nature of the decision, how the review was conducted, what was taken into account, the rationale for the decision reached, and how to escalate their case to stage 2; and
• Stage 2: Within 40 working days of receipt of the parent’s request, for an independent appeal panel to consider written and verbal representations, a detailed decision is sent setting out: the nature of the decision reached; how the review was conducted; what factors were considered; the rationale for the decision reached; and information about appealing to us.

(Department of Education, Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance 2023, Part 5)

Council’s transport policy

11. The Council’s transport policy reflects the legislation outlined above.

What happened

12. I have summarised below the key events; this is not intended to be a detailed account.
13. Ms X’s child, Y, received free school transport while at primary school.
14. In July 2024, Ms X applied for free school transport for Y to secondary school.
15. The Council considered Ms X’s transport application. It sent Ms X a letter in August 2024 saying she had been unsuccessful because Y did not meet the criteria.
16. Y started attending secondary school in September 2024.
17. Ms X appealed the decision to the Council in November 2024. In her supporting letter, Ms X said she struggled to take Y out of the house alone and takes her everywhere by taxi. Y’s behaviour is unpredictable and she has no sense of danger. In the past she has run into the road and attacked a stranger.
18. The Council re-considered the transport application under stage one of its appeal process and considered supporting documents which included a letter of support completed by the school, a letter of support from a healthcare professional, supporting statement from Ms X, uber receipts and Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan.
19. The Council wrote to Ms X in February 2025 and said it re-considered the application under stage one of its appeal process but upheld its refusal. It explained the extra information Ms X provided did not justify a change to the original decision. The Councils letters explained that where a ‘child meets the eligibility criteria, then the Council must make the travel arrangements that it considers necessary to secure your child’s attendance at school.’ It also explained the Council has discretion to make travel arrangements for children who are not eligible, but only in exceptional circumstances.
20. Ms X was unhappy with the Council’s decision and asked for a stage two appeal in April 2025 which included the same evidence as her stage one appeal. She did not present any new information.
21. The panel considered the appeal and decided to allow the appeal. The Council wrote to Ms X in May 2025 and said ‘It was decided at stage 2 panel that [Y] did meet the eligibility criteria outlined…’ in the Council’s transport policy.
22. The Council provided school transport for Y from the middle of June 2025.

The complaint

23. In May 2025, Ms X complained to a Councillor who put in a complaint to the Council on her behalf. Ms X complained the Council took ten months to decide her application for transport during which time she had spent money on taxis to transport her child to school. She asked the Council to pay her back this money.
24. In its response, the Council said there was no right to a refund for travel costs. It also referred to the delay in Ms X sending the appeal.
25. Ms X complained to us in June 2025. She said the Council took a long time to complete the application and appeal and said she had spent money on taxis during this time to transport her child to school safely in a taxi.
26. In conversation with me, Ms X said she is happy she has the transport now but explained how hard it had been for her to transport her child for the ten months before the Council agreed. She said the taxis are different prices each day, but on average she spent £15 per day. Ms X gave the Council uber receipts which show a single journey costing roughly between £4 and £6.
27. Ms X told me she gave a lot of evidence in support of her stage one appeal. At the final stage, she said there was nothing new to present as she had already provided all the evidence she had.

Analysis

28. Authorities must make suitable home to school travel arrangements for a child that meets the eligibility criteria. It can also apply discretion in exceptional circumstances and arrange school travel for children who are not eligible.
29. The Council’s stage two appeal response letter said Y ‘did meet the criteria’ for transport. It did not use discretion to make any exceptions for Y. Where a child meets the criteria, the Council must arrange free school transport for the child. It did this at the stage two appeal.
30. The stage two appeal decision is different to the stage one appeal decision. The stage one appeal decision said Y did not meet the criteria and it refused the appeal. Neither did it consider there were exceptional circumstances to use discretion and make an exception for Y.
31. Ms X did not give any new evidence at the stage two appeal, nothing changed. Both the stage one and stage two appeal considered the same evidence.
32. As the stage two panel considered the same evidence as the stage one, both decisions should have been the same. This is especially the case as the stage two panel decided Y met the criteria for school transport; it did not consider there were exceptional circumstances requiring the use discretion. Both appeals should have made the same decision. They did not. This was fault.
33. The stage one decision in February 2025 should have been to allow Ms X’s appeal and provide Y with free school transport. Y should have received school transport from this time. The Council started providing school transport in June 2025, shortly after the stage two appeal. This was a period of around four months that Y was without school transport. Ms X had to pay for taxis to transport her child to school during this time. This was injustice.
34. Ms X also was put to extra time and trouble bringing a stage two appeal. This was injustice.
35. As Y now receives free school transport so there is no continuing financial injustice.

Back to top

Action

36. Within four weeks of the final decision, the Council should:
• Apologise and pay Ms X £150 for the distress, time and trouble caused by having to make a stage two appeal and the delay providing school transport. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended.
• Write to Ms X and request evidence of the money she spent on school transport for Y from the date of the stage one appeal decision in February 2025, to the date it provided school transport in May 2025. Within four weeks of receiving this evidence from Ms X, the Council should pay her this amount.
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

38. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman