Summary: We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint about post-16 transport because there is not enough evidence of fault, and nothing we could add to the Council’s response.

The complaint

1. Mr F complains the Council has failed to provide suitable transport arrangements to enable his son to attend college in a nearby town. He explained there was no longer a direct bus to the village where he lives that would allow his son to leave the college when he finished at 17:00. Mr F considers the journey to be unsafe.
2. He asked the Council to reinstate the direct bus service, or fund alternative transport for his son to college.
3. In response to Mr F’s complaint, the Council explained its post-16 education transport policy. The Council noted Mr F had not applied for transport assistance and suggested he apply.
4. Mr F complained the Council had not responded to his complaint. He said he was not asking for financial assistance, but believed the Council had a statutory duty under s508B of the Education Act 1996 to ensure there were suitable travel arrangements in place. He does not believe the existing arrangements are suitable.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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
• we could not add to any previous response by the Council.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr F.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr F’s complaint appears to be based on a misunderstanding.
9. Section 508B of the Education Act 1996 sets out a council’s duties to eligible children of compulsory school age. Mr F’s son is not a child of compulsory school age, so section 508B does not apply. Different provisions apply to Mr F’s son.
10. The Council outlined the relevant provisions when it responded to Mr F’s complaint. The Council noted Mr F had not applied for transport assistance and provided a link to the online application. The Council said that if an award was made, transport would be arranged to support travel at the start and end of the standard college day.
11. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. The Council has outlined the relevant provisions and suggested Mr F apply for transport assistance. If his son is eligible, the Council said it will arrange the necessary transport. There is nothing I could add to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, and there is nothing we could add to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman