Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse home to school transport. It is unlikely we would find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council should provide home to school transport for his child B.

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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (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 Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Summary of events

5. Mr X’s child B obtained a place at a grammar school, Z. B is a former looked after child. Z is around nine miles from their home. Taking the journey by public bus would take over two hours. Mr X applied for home to school transport. The Council refused at the first stage and on review. Mr X appealed to the Council’s internal appeals’ process. It also refused to grant home to school transport. Z is not their nearest mainstream school but is their nearest grammar school.

Background law and guidance

6. 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)

7. Councils should have an appeals process in place for parents who wish to appeal about the eligibility of their child for travel support.
8. 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)

Analysis

9. The Council is not required to make special home to school transport arrangements for former looked after children.
10. Suitable school does not mean the most suitable school for a child. This means when a child qualifies for grammar school, for home to school transport purposes the nearest suitable school is any mainstream school.
11. The Council’s decision is in line with both the law and its policy. The appeal’s decision letter shows its actively considered the reasons Mr X gave for it to use its discretion. It demonstrates the appeal panel considered his case.
12. 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 a Council 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 you disagree with the decision the Council made.
13. In making its decision, the Council took account of the relevant guidance, information from Mr X, and its own policies. It is unlikely our investigation would find fault in the Council’s decision which has caused Mr X to lose out on home to school transport.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman