Summary: Mrs X complained the Council wrongly refused free home-to-school transport for her son, Y. We found fault in the Council’s decision-making process and failure to retain records. This caused Mrs X uncertainty about the outcome and avoidable time and trouble. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council refused to provide free home-to-school transport for her son, Y. She said the school is over three miles from their home and Y does not feel safe travelling independently following incidents involving other pupils. She also said the Council offered a paid transport option costing £795 per year, which the family cannot afford, and that Y’s sibling receives free transport to the same school. Mrs X said the Council did not properly consider Y’s safety or the family’s circumstances when deciding the appeal. As a result, she says Y is unable to travel safely to school and the family is under financial pressure.

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. 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

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation 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)
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)

What happened

9. Mrs X applied for home-to-school transport assistance for Y in March 2025. The Council refused the application in early April 2025. It said Y was not attending his nearest suitable school and identified three schools closer to the family home. It said the school Y attends was further away and therefore transport was not an entitlement.
10. Mrs X appealed the decision. The Council considered the appeal at Stage 1 in April 2025 and upheld its original decision. Mrs X then requested a Stage 2 appeal, raising concerns about Y’s safety, financial hardship, and the fact his sibling attends the same school and receives free transport.
11. An appeal hearing took place in August 2025. Mrs X attended and presented her case. The panel considered the Council’s policy and Mrs X’s representations. It decided the policy had been applied correctly and refused the appeal. The Council wrote to Mrs X in mid-August 2025 confirming its decision. It also advised there was an option to purchase transport at a cost of £795 per year.
12. During my investigation, I asked the Council to provide evidence of how it determined the nearer schools were suitable. The Council provided correspondence with its admissions team dated 29 May 2025. The admissions team said that had Y applied, they would have been offered a place at any of the three nearest schools. It also confirmed it does not retain notes of appeal hearings and disposes of related paperwork after issuing the decision letter.

Analysis and findings

13. Councils must provide free home-to-school transport where a child attends their nearest suitable school and lives beyond the statutory walking distance. Where a child attends a different school, councils may refuse transport. However, for a school to be considered “suitable”, the Council must be satisfied the child could reasonably attend it. This includes consideration of whether a place was available at the school at the relevant time.
14. The Council refused Mrs X’s application because Y was not attending his nearest suitable school. It identified three nearer schools and relied on distance to determine these were suitable alternatives.
15. However, the Council’s own policy states that a child must attend the nearest suitable school with places available to qualify for transport. This means the Council needed to establish that places were available at the nearer schools when it made its decision.
16. The Council was asked to confirm whether it had checked availability at those schools and to provide evidence during the course of our investigation. The Council provided correspondence with its admissions team dated late May 2025. This is after the original decision in early April 2025. It does not demonstrate that the Council established whether places were available at the time it made its decision. No further evidence was provided to show the Council satisfied itself that places were available when determining the application.
17. There is also evidence suggesting at least one of the identified schools may not have had a place available. Mrs X told the Council during the appeal process this school was her first choice but Y was not offered a place there. This raises further doubt about the accuracy of the Council’s records and whether it was appropriate for the Council to treat that school as a suitable alternative.
18. In the absence of evidence that the Council established whether places were available at the nearer schools at the relevant time, it is not possible to be satisfied that the Council properly determined those schools were “nearest suitable” in line with its policy. This amounts to fault.
19. The Council operated a two-stage appeal and Mrs X was able to present her case at a hearing. The decision letter indicates the panel was aware of its discretionary powers and the available options. However, there is no clear record of how the panel considered whether to exercise discretion or its reasons for deciding not to do so. It is not possible to determine how these matters were considered in the absence of detailed records of the panel’s deliberations.
20. The Council confirmed it does not retain notes of appeal hearings and disposes of relevant paperwork after issuing its decision. This means there is no independent record of the panel’s deliberations and limits transparency and scrutiny of decision-making. It is not possible to establish how the panel considered the exercise of discretion in this case. This is poor administrative practice and amounts to fault.

Injustice

21. The Council’s failure to properly establish whether places were available at nearer schools meant Mrs X was deprived of a properly made decision about her son’s eligibility for transport. This caused her uncertainty and avoidable time and trouble in pursuing her appeal.
22. The Council’s failure to retain adequate records of the appeal hearing limits transparency and the ability to scrutinise how the decision was reached. However, this did not cause Mrs X a significant additional personal injustice beyond that already identified.

Back to top

Action

23. To remedy the injustice caused, within one month of the final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Mrs X for the injustice caused by the faults identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Reconsider Mrs X’s application for home to school transport at stage 1 with the offer of a further appeal if transport is refused. Ensure it properly establishes whether places were available at the schools it considers to be nearer suitable schools at the relevant time. Provide a decision to Mrs X with clear reasons, setting out the evidence relied upon. If the application is approved, refund Mrs X any payments she may have made for the cost of school transport.
• Pay Mrs X £100 in recognition of the uncertainty caused by the fault and the time and trouble she experienced in pursuing the matter.
24. To prevent similar faults in future, the Council should, within three months of the final decision:
• Review arrangements for recording and retaining home to school transport appeal hearing records in line with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This should include identifying any gaps in current practice and setting out an action plan of steps it will take to ensure adequate, consistent records of appeal panel proceedings and decisions are maintained.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

26. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman