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 on balance 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 in 2024. Mr X complained the Council’s two stage appeals process was unfairly implemented and reached an unjust decision. This has caused them 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 my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

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 guidance states ‘the panel members should be independent of the original decision-making but need not be independent of the local authority. They should have the knowledge, skills and experience to ensure that the local authority complies with its statutory duties, that a balance is achieved between meeting the needs of parents and of the local authority, and that children are not placed at unnecessary risk’.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. The guidance sets out that councils should keep their school travel policy under regular review to ensure it continues to meet local needs and complies with statutory requirements. An up to date policy must be available by 19 September each year so parents may take it into account when deciding which schools to apply for in the normal admissions round.

The Council’s home to school travel policy

15. 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.
16. 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.
17. 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’.
18. In relation to discretionary arrangements the policy states that ‘where there is capacity in existing dedicated transport services provided for eligible children, it may be possible for spare seats to be purchased by parents/carers- applications are made through the Council website’.
19. 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

20. 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.
21. 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’.
22. 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.
23. 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’.
24. 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’.
25. 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

26. In the normal admissions round Mr X successfully applied for his child to attend a selective grammar school in his catchment area, school A. In May 2025 he received a letter advising him that Y did not qualify for free home to school transport as school A was not their nearest suitable school. School B was the nearest school based on distance.
27. Mr X submitted a stage one appeal in early June 2025. The Council responded in mid June and did not uphold the appeal.
28. Mr X asked to go to stage two of the appeals procedure in July 2025. His case included that the stage one response was generic and did not consider his individual circumstances. He said he had twice in June requested information on the Council’s mapping system which it had not been provided. He said his MP had also requested this information. Mr X considered this imperative as he believed the distances were incorrect. Mr X said they viewed schools and made their decision before the policy was implemented. Mr X also considered he would not get a fair hearing as the committee comprised of council members who voted for or against the policy.
29. Shortly after Mr X submitted his stage two appeal the Council responded to his emails with the requested mapping information.
30. The Council heard Mr X’s appeal in August 2025. The Council’s report to the committee noted school A was not the nearest school. Mr X raised questions about the change in the Council’s policy and said the family made their decision long before the Council’s new home to school transport policy was introduced. The Council said the choice was parental preference. It said information was available to parents prior to them submitting their school choices.
31. At the appeal the Council’s representative said Y would have received a place at school B and places were still available at the school.
32. Mr X explained that the process of applying for school A started much earlier than the selection test date in September 2024. It involved tuition and mock exams. Mr X said Y had a special education needs (SEN) report and he felt school B would be unable to meet this based on their Ofsted report. Mr X said the distance to both schools was the same on Google maps. The Council explained it used a different bespoke system (GIS), and parents could have obtained distance information at the time they submitted their application.
33. Mr X presented his case. He said the school choice was not just based on location but age, ability and aptitude. Y had passed the selection test and Y’s SEN needs was part of the selection process. School A was a suitable school. He said the family had relied on the previous policy and asked the panel to use its discretion to consider school A as the nearest school. The Council’s representative explained the transport policy defined what a qualifying school was. Mr X said the change in policy was not made clear on the website and the first they were aware of the change was when Y did not get a bus pass. The committee members noted the policy was correctly applied, all schools should be able to meet Y’s SEN needs and there were no exceptional circumstances. They did not uphold the appeal.

Findings

The change in policy

34. 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.
35. 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. The Council corrected this in March 2025, but this was after Mr X had applied for school admission.
36. 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 a 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.
37. 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.
38. This poor communication is fault. However, on balance, even if the Council had communicated the change without fault, given Y passed the test to attend school A, I do not consider the change in policy would have resulted in a change in the school they applied for and accepted. Therefore, this fault did not cause a significant personal injustice. At the appeal in August 2025, the Council said there were still places available at school B. So, if free transport was an overriding consideration, it was open to Y to change schools.
39. Given Mr X wanted Y to attend a selective school, he explained at the appeal that the choice of school was made significantly earlier than the application date so that tuition and practice exams could take place. Mr X may have made a different decision had he known far enough in advance that transport would not be provided to school A. However, the Code of Guidance says that councils must have an up to date policy available by 19 September each year so parents can take it into account when deciding what schools to apply for. The Council’s policy was available by that date so, there was no fault in the date the policy was published.

Mr X’s appeal

40. 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.
41. 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.
42. In his complaint to us, Mr X raised a concern that the transport appeals committee was made up of councillors who had previously voted on the new policy. The statutory guidance says it is for councils to determine how their appeals process will operate and that panel members should be independent of the original decision-making process but do not need to be independent of the Council. The councillors involved in the appeals committee were not those who made the original decision to refuse transport. The Council is not at fault for using an appeals committee made up of local councillors. There is no evidence of bias.

Back to top

Decision

43. I find fault not causing injustice

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman