Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the withdrawal of home-to-school transport for her child. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to warrant our further involvement.

The complaint

1. Mrs X said the Council wrongly withdrew school transport for her child. She said this left them without a suitable post-16 school place they could attend.

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 further right of appeal and can only find fault with the Council’s decision if it was not properly taken. We would expect the Council to consider the case a parent puts forward at a transport appeal, but if it does so and reaches a decision with clear reasons that are arguable, we cannot offer an alternative view, or decide on issues of fairness.
6. In this case, Mrs X’s child had attended a school since Year 7 and wished to continue there in the sixth form. The school is at some distance from the family home. The Council had provided school transport by taxi until the end of Year 11, when the child ceased to be of compulsory school age. The child has an Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council did not have a duty to provide transport after compulsory school age, but it needed to consider whether it should exercise discretion to do so.
7. Mrs X appealed against the Council’s decision to end the transport provision. She provided a copy of the Council’s final latter after it heard her appeal. This laid out the grounds she gave for the child’s continued need for transport provision. It also laid out the Council’s grounds for ending it. And it made clear the grounds why the appeal panel decided not to continue transport. The panel was therefore entitled to reach the decision it did. I cannot therefore offer an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because doing so would be unlikely to lead to a finding of fault in the conduct of the transport panel.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman