Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of home to school transport for Miss X’s brother. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or significant personal injustice to warrant us investigating. Even if we did investigate, it would not lead to a worthwhile or significantly different outcome, and we will not look at complaint handling in isolation. Any new issues with the transport need to be put to the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complained the Council failed to provide accurate information about home to school transport for her brother (Y) who was starting a new school. Miss X says this caused distress to Y and his mother (Ms Z) on whose behalf Miss X complains. Miss X says the Council failed to respond to her complaints and feels her concerns have been dismissed. Miss X says there have been recent incidents with Y’s school transport.

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, 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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
4. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

7. This is a summary of what happened. It is not meant to show everything.
8. Y’s brother, who has Special Educational Needs, was due to start a new school in May 2025. The Council told Ms Z transport would start on 06 May 2025. Miss X complains the Council did not confirm the exact transport arrangements, as it had said it would, and that the transport did not arrive on 06 May.
9. The Council responded to a complaint and said transport would start on 12 May. This was within the 10 working days the Council aims to provide transport. It said it recognised the importance of transport and apologised for any inconvenience.
10. Miss X asked the Council to escalate her complaint. She said it was not about the timescales to arrange transport but about poor communication. She said callbacks which the Council had promised were missed, and there had been no proper investigation or recognition of the impact on Y.
11. The Council said it would escalate Miss X’s complaint. This did not happen and it only responded after the Ombudsman asked the Council what was happening.
12. The Council responded to Miss X in September 2025 and apologised for the worry and confusion caused. It said it was happy to hear transport was in place understood Miss X’s concerns were about the initial delay in communication. It apologised for this and accepted it had not sent formal responses to Miss X’s stage 1 and 2 complaints.
13. In her complaint to the Ombudsman, Miss X said she felt the Council was dismissive and she did not feel heard or listened to. Miss X confirmed that when the Council had finally responded there had been no issues with transport – but Miss X also set out some problems which had since occurred.

Assessment

14. While I understand Miss X and Ms Z’s frustrations, we will not start an investigation into this complaint.
15. We only have limited resources, and we do not investigate all the complaints we receive. We investigate the cases where the fault or personal injustice is most significant and where we can achieve a meaningful outcome.
16. The Council was clearly wrong when it said transport would start on 06 May and this did not happen. The Council has accepted this and that it did not keep Ms Z informed about what was happening. It has also apologised for not properly responding to Miss X’s complaints.
17. So, while there is some evidence of fault, it is not enough to warrant us investigating. The personal injustice caused is also not significant enough to warrant our involvement. Even if we were to investigate, it is unlikely that we could add anything to the Council’s response or that we would achieve a different outcome.
18. Miss X is unhappy with the Council’s handling of her complaint. But we will not normally look at complaint handling in isolation. Also, given the Council has accepted issues with its complaint handling, further consideration of this point would be unlikely to achieve anything more. Investigation by the Ombudsman is not therefore warranted.
19. Any recent issues with transport need to be put to the Council. If Miss X or Ms Z were unhappy with the Council’s response they could make a fresh complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

20. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because:
• There is not enough evidence of fault or significant injustice.
• An investigation would be unlikely to achieve a different outcome.
• It is not appropriate for us to look at complaint handling in isolation.
• Any new issues need to be put to the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman