Summary: There was some fault in the way the Council publicised its new home to school transport policy. However, this did not cause Mr X a significant injustice as this would not have affected Mr X’s decision regarding the school applied for their child to attend. There was no evidence of fault in the way the appeals committee considered Mr X’s appeal against the Council’s decision not to provide free transport.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision not to provide his child Y with free transport to their catchment secondary school following a change in the Council’s home to school transport policy. Mr X says the Council failed to properly communicate the new policy and he was not aware the Council would discriminate between two schools which are equidistant by road. This has caused him frustration and uncertainty.

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. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. I gave Mr X and the Council an opportunity to comment on a draft of my decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

8. 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’ includes children living outside ‘statutory walking distance’ from the school (two miles for children under eight, three miles for children aged eight and above).
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: review by independent appeal panel. Within 40 working days of receipt of the parent’s request to escalate to stage 2, an independent appeal panel considers written and verbal representations. Within five working days following this, 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)

11. The statutory code of guidance sets out that:
• The statutory walking distances are used to determine whether a child is eligible for free travel to school. This is not necessarily the shortest distance by road. The route may include footpaths, bridleways, other pathways and alternative entrances to the school.
• Where the schools are beyond walking distance, councils may consider it more appropriate to measure the shortest road route or the straight line distance. It should be made clear in the council’s school travel policy how the route will be measured.
• It should be clear to parents how they can find out which is their nearest school for admissions purposes and which is the nearest for school free transport purposes.
• Councils must publish their travel policy on their website and include information about their school travel policy in their composite prospectus for school admissions.
12. The guidance says an effective school travel policy will:
• Be easy for parents to find on the council’s website;
• Be clearly written so that parents may easily understand it;
• Enable parents to understand the circumstances in which a child is eligible for free travel to school;
• Tell parents how and when they should apply for free travel to school; and
• Tell parents how they may appeal against the council’s decision in relation to travel to school for their child.

The Council’s home to school travel policy

13. The Council operates catchment areas for admission to some of the schools in its area. This means those living in a certain geographical area get priority if a school is oversubscribed. Until 2024 the Council provided school transport to the catchment area school for those living over three miles away.
14. In September 2024 the Council implemented a new Home To School Travel Policy. Under the new policy the Council only provides free transport to new applicants attending the nearest qualifying school to home. This meant certain towns and villages no longer qualified for transport to a catchment school and the nearest qualifying school may be in another council’s area.
15. The policy explained the nearest suitable school for school travel purposes may not be the catchment school used for admissions purposes. It said:
• ‘When deciding on eligibility for assistance with transport, the measurement from home to school will be taken from the fixed point within the property to the nearest entrance point (not always the main entrance) to the school following the nearest available walked route, as defined by the Council’s Geographical Information System (GIS)’.
• ‘The distance is not the shortest distance by road and the route may include footpaths, public rights of way, bridleways and other pathways identified on the GIS’.
• ‘Parents have the right to preference any school of their choice when applying for a school place, they do not however have a right to free-of-charge travel arrangements to that school. Travel eligibility will be assessed in line with the eligibility criteria in this policy. If the nearest school is undersubscribed with places available, then it will be the nearest suitable school for travel purposes, and free travel would not be provided to an alternative school that is further away’.
• ‘If the nearest school is fully subscribed without places available, then the Council will need to assess if the child could have secured a place had one been applied for. This will be done by comparing the child with the last child to be offered a place at the school and determining which of them would have higher priority. This will often be a straightforward matter of determining which child lives closest to the school’.
16. The Council operates a two stage appeal procedure: a stage one review by a senior officer and a stage two appeal heard by the Council’s school transport appeals committee (a small group of elected councillors). The policy states that the committee considers the policy guidelines but may recommend departure from those guidelines in exceptional cases.

Publication of the new home to school transport policy

17. The Council carried out consultation regarding the new policy in early 2024 including webinars and face to face events in March 2024. The Council agreed the policy at its executive meeting in July 2024.
18. In early September 2024, the Council sent an email to schools with a request that it be forwarded to parents of those due to start secondary school in September 2025 about the secondary school admission process. The email included one line which said ‘there have been some changes in eligibility to home to school transport, so if this is an important factor when choosing a school please go to: [weblink]. Here you can use the online tool to find your nearest school to your home address’.
19. The link went to the Council’s School Transport page which contained two separate links to the policy, one of which linked to the 2019 policy instead of the new policy. The Council corrected this error in March 2025. The Council’s school transport page also included a distance calculator which would list the nearest schools to home.
20. In September 2024 the Council also sent schools via its weekly email under the ‘information, updates and guidance’ section ‘a request that the information attached is made available to parents as part of secondary open evenings’. The attached information was a slide presentation which set out that the revised home to school travel policy was being implemented and ‘the main eligibility criteria for eligible pupils is for travel to their nearest suitable school with places available’.
21. The Council’s website for starting secondary school included a link to the September 2024 home to school transport policy. A line on the website page said, ‘we provide free school transport to the nearest school to your home if it is over the required walking distance’.
22. The application disclaimer also said, ‘Please note if you apply for and are allocated a school which is not your nearest suitable school with places available you will be responsible for getting your child to school’.

What happened

23. Mr X lives in the catchment area for two schools: a selective grammar school (school A) and an academy (school B) which are geographically close together. Applicants can apply for both schools and those who pass the selection test will be offered a place at the grammar school.
24. Mr X successfully applied for his child to attend the selective grammar school, School A, in the normal admissions round. In May 2025 the Council wrote to Mr X and informed him Y was not eligible for school transport.
25. Mr X submitted an appeal that same month. He said he chose the closest school and understood he would get school transport as his older children had. He had no idea the policy had changed until he received the Council’s letter. He said the Council’s old policy was still on the website and an email sent to parents did not make it clear what the change in policy was. He said the same school bus served both schools and he had no idea the schools were slightly different distances away. He said the policy did not say the distances were measured to 1/1000th of a mile.
26. The Council sent Mr X its stage one review in June 2025. It said School A was not the nearest school. It noted the distances were close but said measurements were taken to nearest 1000th of a mile to provide fairness to all families. It said older siblings were assessed under the previous policy and the current policy has been applied to new applications. It did not uphold the review.
27. In July 2025 Mr X asked to go to stage two of the appeal procedure. He reiterated that the policy did not explain distances were measured to 1000th of a mile. In summary he said:
• it was unreasonable to expect parents to appreciate the measurement would be to this scale without articulating it.
• pupils going to school A and school B would get on and off at the same bus stops. This was not a situation where a different bus was needed but was exactly the same journey and the blanket application of the policy was unreasonable.
• the Council had a statutory duty to ensure the policy was easy to understand. He said the stage one response simply confirmed the policy but did not take account of their individual circumstances.
• there was no public transport to either school so they would need to drive, increasing traffic when the Council had a statutory duty to promote sustainable travel.
28. The Council heard Mr X’s appeal in August 2025. The Council’s presenting officer explained the nearest school was defined by the walked route rather than the route buses take. Although the Council’s policy did not state that measurements were taken to 1000th of a mile, the policy did make it clear that the measurements used may mean people living next door to each other may qualify differently for transport. They said Y would have got a place at the nearer school, school B, had they applied.
29. Mr X said he could not make an informed choice of school and both schools were using the same bus service. Mr X explained he started work early and could not get Y to school without a bus pass. The Council presenting officer said there was an option on the website to request information as to which is the nearest school and a three point check before making a school application. A committee member asked Mr X if he believed the policy was applied correctly to Y. Mr X said yes but it made no sense. Mr X explained Y’s sibling was at the school and peers were also going there.
30. The committee decide the policy was correctly applied and there were no exceptional circumstances. It expressed some sympathy with parents that the same bus went to both schools using the same school car park but the policy was based on distance from home to the schools, not the car park. It did not uphold the appeal.

Findings

The change in policy

31. The law does not specify how a council should determine which is the nearest school. The statutory guidance says councils may wish to use the road route for journeys over three miles but does not require them to do so. The Council’s policy sets out that it calculates the nearest suitable school by measuring the nearest available walking route which includes public rights of way using GIS. The Council is entitled to take this approach.
32. We expect councils to explain their policies clearly to enable parents to make informed decisions when applying for schools about whether their child might be eligible for free school transport. The evidence shows the Council consulted widely on the new policy but there was some fault in the way it was communicated. The Council’s website wrongly linked to the old policy as well as the new which was fault.
33. The Council’s new policy is a significant change from its previous one. In particular, free transport is no longer automatically provided to catchment area schools over three miles away. The Council’s website referred to transport being provided to the nearest suitable school, but parents are not expected to be experts in the subtlety of language used in Government guidance and what is meant by suitable school. A parent may wrongly assume the catchment school is the nearest suitable school. It is only within the transport policy itself that the Council states ‘the nearest qualifying school for school travel purposes may not be the catchment school used for admissions purposes’. The Council did not clearly spell out on its website or admissions form that transport would not automatically be provided to the catchment school if it was over three miles away.
34. Although the Council circulated information to all schools, this was in the ‘information, updates and guidance’ section and not in the ‘for action’ section of the email. It asked secondary schools to make parents aware there were policy changes but did not ask primary schools to highlight the changes to year 6 parents who would be applying for secondary school. The attached presentation slides emphasised free transport would be provided to the nearest suitable school but as set out above did not clearly set out that this was not necessarily the catchment school.
35. On balance, this poor communication is fault. However, Mr X confirmed that even if the Council had communicated the change without fault, given Y passed the test to attend school A, the change in policy would not have resulted in a change in the school they applied for and accepted. Therefore, this fault did not cause a significant personal injustice.

Mr X’s appeal

36. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a council’s decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes it followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, the law says we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision it made.
37. Although the distance between the two schools is small, the Council is still entitled to decide which is the nearest school for free school transport purposes based on the home to school location, not to where the school bus stops. The committee was satisfied the distance to the two schools was correctly calculated in line with the policy and the policy was correctly applied. The records show the committee took into account Mr X’s personal circumstances and decided not to uphold the appeal. There was no fault in the way it reached this decision.

Back to top

Decision

38. I find fault not causing injustice

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman