Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse free home-to-school transport for the complainant’s child because there is not enough evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse his application and appeal for free home-to-school transport for his child.

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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X asked the Council to provide home-to-school transport for his child. The Council refused on the grounds the child does not attend the closest school with places available in his year group. Mr X used his right to appeal against the Council’s decision at Stages 1 and 2 of the Council’s appeal process.
6. There is no indication of fault in the way the Council reached its initial decision or considered the Stage 1 appeal.
7. Mr X says the Council’s transport team misled the Stage 2 appeal committee on many points, including that there were spaces available in his closest school at the time of application and there were no places on the Council-provided bus serving both that and his preferred school.
8. The case documents show the committee considered the standard eligibility criteria as well as whether Mr X’s situation amounted to exceptional circumstances warranting the use of its discretion. It concluded Mr X’s child was not eligible because his closest school had places available at the point of application and it was Mr X’s choice not to apply, and that there were no exceptional circumstances. The appeal committee was entitled to rely on the evidence before it regarding the availability of bus places and in any case, that matter is not so significant as to bring the committee’s decision into question. We will not therefore investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault on the Council’s part.
9. Mr X disagrees with the committee’s decision but there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the committee members used their judgement. That being the case, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision or intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman