Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Mrs X’s application for free home-to-school transport for her child. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council refusing free home-to-school transport for her child. She says this has caused her son to miss out on formal education.

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))
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X withdrew her child from their school and enrolled them in a school farther away from her home. She applied for free home-to-school transport for her child.
7. Councils have a duty to provide free home-to-school transport for eligible children. The Council’s school travel assistance policy provides details of how it assesses eligibility for school transport and how it will meet its duties. The Council decided Mrs X’s child was not eligible for free home-to-school transport, under its policy. The policy does not entitle a child to free transport in the circumstances of Mrs X’s child.
8. Mrs X appealed the decision. The Council’s appeal panel upheld the decision. The panel recognised it could use its discretion to provide transport but did not judge the circumstances here warranted that.
9. We are not an appeal body. We may only criticise a council’s decision where there is evidence of fault in its decision-making process and but for that fault officers would have made a different decision. So we consider the processes councils have followed to make their decisions. We cannot replace a council’s decision with our own or someone else’s opinion if the decision was reached after following the proper process.
10. We are unlikely to find fault with how the Council came to its decision. The Council considered its policy and the information it had about the child’s circumstances. It gave reasons for its decision. Mrs X is entitled to disagree with the decision, but that does not mean the Council was at fault.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman