Summary: Mr X complained the Council has not arranged education transport for his daughter, Y. Mr X said this distressed him. There was fault in the way the Council required Mr X to transport Y to and from school without his consent, despite accepting a transport duty for Y. This frustrated and distressed Mr X. The Council agreed to apologise and make a financial payment.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has not arranged education transport for his daughter, Y. Mr X said this distressed him.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a Council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read Mr X’s complaint and spoke to him about it on the phone.
6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

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’ include:

• children living outside ‘statutory walking distance’ from the school (two miles for children under eight, three miles for children aged eight and above);
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot reasonably be expected to walk to school because of their special educational needs, disability or mobility problem;
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot walk to school because the route is unsafe; and
• children entitled on low-income grounds. (Education Act 1996, 508B(1) and Schedule 35B)

9. A child will not normally be eligible for free travel to school on the grounds of their special educational needs, disability, or mobility problem, or on the grounds that the route is unsafe, if they would be able to walk to school if they were accompanied.
10. A child will not normally be eligible solely because their parent’s work commitments or caring responsibilities mean they are unable to accompany their child themselves. Councils must consider cases where the parent says there are good reasons why they are unable to accompany their child, or make other suitable arrangements for their journey, and make a decision on the basis of the circumstances of each case.
11. Where the local authority determines that a child would be able to walk if they were accompanied, the general expectation is that the parent will accompany them or make other suitable arrangements for their journey to and from school. (Department of Education, Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance 2023, paragraphs 47 to 52)
12. If only one school is named in a young person’s EHC plan, then that is the school the council has determined is the nearest suitable school for the child. It is therefore the nearest ‘qualifying school’ for the child to attend for school transport consideration. This is because the council has not made arrangements for the child to attend a closer school. (S and another v Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council [2012] EWCA Civ 346.) Where the child is attending the ‘nearest suitable school’, they will qualify for free transport, provided any other relevant conditions are met.
13. The statutory guidance, “Travel to and from school for children of compulsory school age”, says council’s can meet their duty in a range of alternative ways, provided they have the consent of the parent. (Department of Education, Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance 2023, paragraph 68 and 69)
14. The Council school transport policy gives four options for providing transport. They are:
• Travel training;
• Public transport travel pass;
• Personal travel budget; and
• Once all the above options have been ruled out, it may provide directly provided transport.
15. A previous Ombudsman investigation the Council accepted a parent must consent to a personal travel budget. Following the previous investigation, the Council has produced a new policy, but the Council considered Mr X’s case using this policy.

What happened

16. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
17. Y has special educational needs and has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. Y attends the specialist school named in the EHC Plan.
18. Mr X applied for transport for Y. The Council visited the family in June 2025. The Council noted it was a parent’s responsibility to arrange travel arrangements for getting their children to school. Mr X asked the Council for transport to school. The Council agreed to offer a personal travel budget for a family member to escort Y to and from school. Mr X appealed against the Council’s decision and asked for school transport on directly provided fleet transport.
19. The Council considered Mr X’s appeal at the end of June 2025. The appeal panel upheld the Council decision to award a personal travel budget.
20. Mr X appealed against the Council’s decision in September 2025. The Council considered Mr X’s appeal two weeks later. The appeal panel awarded Mr X a personal travel budget for mileage costs as he was driving Y to school.
21. Mr X told the Council he did not want to accept a personal travel budget at the end of September 2025. The Council confirmed this was its final decision.
22. Mr X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Mr X would like the Council to provide transport.
23. Mr X asked the Council for transport assistance again in January 2026. The Council confirmed it offered a personal travel budget, but Mr X had not accepted this offer.
24. In response to my enquiries the Council stated it was not supporting Mr X as he rejected the Council's offer. After further enquiries, the Council reconsidered Mr X’s case, applying its updated policy, and offered to transport Y on a fleet transport bus.

My findings

25. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes the Council followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
26. The Council agreed Y was eligible for transport assistance to and from school and awarded a personal travel budget. In deciding what travel arrangements to make, the Council relied on its policy, which gives four options for meeting its duty to provide suitable home-to-school travel arrangements. The previous policy said it will only provide direct transport if it ruled out all other options. However, the policy makes no mention of a parent needing to consent to arrangements.
27. The statutory guidance, referenced in paragraph 13 says the legislation permits local authorities to meet their duty in respect of an eligible child in a range of alternative ways, “provided they have the consent of the parent”. Mr X has told the Council and the Ombudsman he did not agree to the personal travel budget. I note the Council has only offered the personal travel budget and required Mr X to transport Y.
28. In response to a previous Ombudsman investigation, the Council agreed to update its policy to explain a parent must consent to a personal travel budget. However, in this case, the Council relied on the previous policy in place at the time where this was not specified. There is no evidence the Council had Mr X’s agreement before deciding he should have a personal travel budget. This is not in line with statutory guidance. This is fault. A personal travel budget is voluntary. Mr X was transporting Y to school when the Council accepted a duty to Y. This is fault, causing Mr X frustration and distress.
29. In response to the Ombudsman, the Council reconsidered this matter and has now offered to transport Y on a bus. However, Mr X has transported Y for nearly an academic year, despite not agreeing to a personal travel budget.
30. I would usually make service improvement recommendations in a case such as this, but I can see other Ombudsman investigations made these. The Council also agreed to update its policy following other investigations. The Ombudsman is actively monitoring the Council’s learning from these recommendations.

Back to top

Action

31. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Mr X by the fault I have identified, the Council agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X for requiring him to have a personal travel budget and continue transporting Y after it accepted a transport duty to Y. 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.
• Pay Mr X £300 to recognise the distress and frustration the Council fault caused.
32. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

33. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman