Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council refusing to provide her child with free transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained the Council has refused to provide her daughter (Y) with free transport to school.

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

What I found

School transport

5. The Department for Education has produced statutory guidance for Councils to help understand their duties regarding school transport. The Guidance states councils have a duty to provide free transport to eligible children who attend their nearest suitable school and:
• live more than the statutory walking distance from that school, or
• who live within statutory walking distance of the school but who cannot reasonably be expected to walk to that school because of their special educational needs, disability, or mobility problem (even if accompanied by their parent), or
• who live within walking distance of the school but would not be able to walk to that school in reasonable safety, even if they were accompanied by their parent.
6. The guidance states that for children of secondary school age the nearest secondary school to home will almost always be their nearest suitable school. The guidance states that it is reasonable for a local authority to expect parents to list their nearest school on their application form if they intend to apply for free travel to school. 
7. Councils also have powers to provide discretionary transport to children who are not eligible children.
8. Councils should have an appeals process for parents to challenge decisions about home to school transport.

Background

9. Mrs X asked the Council to provide Y with transport to the secondary school (School C) she would soon attend. The Council refused Mrs X’s application. It said School C was not the nearest suitable school to Mrs X’s home. This meant there was no entitlement to free transport.
10. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision. Mrs X said that while School B was closer than School C, she did not live within its catchment area and Y would not have been offered a place. Mrs X questioned if the Council provided enough information to parents as part of the admissions process about the impact choosing a school had on transport eligibility. Mrs X raised concerns about the environmental impact of having to drive her daughter to School C. She pointed out School C is less than a mile further away than School B.
11. A senior officer considered Mrs X’s case at the final stage of the Council’s appeals process. They noted School C was the only one Mrs X applied for. The Council’s policy said transport would not be provided if there was a nearer school to home and the parent did not apply for a place; in this case, that was School B. The Council said its position was in line with the statutory guidance. The Council set out the information available to parents. The Council said the distance between School B and School C was not insignificant and the cost and environmental impact of taking Y to School C did not mean the Council should provide transport. The Council refused Mrs X’s appeal.

Assessment

12. We will not start an investigation into Mrs X’s complaint.
13. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether a complainant disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
14. In this case, the Council’s policy is clear that if a parent applies for transport and did not apply for a place at a closer school, they will not be eligible for transport. The statutory guidance makes it clear this approach is acceptable and so it is not one we can question. There is also not enough evidence of fault in the information made available to parents about the Council’s policy.
15. The Council has followed the proper process to consider Mrs X’s application and appeals. Mrs X had a chance to take part in the appeals process and the stage 2 officer considered all the information presented. The Council wrote to Mrs X and explained its decision. While I understand Mrs X is disappointed with the Council’s decision, there is not enough evidence of fault in how it was reached for us to become involved.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman