Summary: We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint about school transport because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr F complains the Council refused his application for home to school transport for his son.

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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(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 F applied for home to school transport for his son. His son attends a special school less than two miles from Mr F’s home. I have not included the details of Mr F’s application to ensure his anonymity.
6. Mr F’s application and subsequent appeals were unsuccessful. The Council decided the school was less than the statutory walking distance from Mr F’s home, and a parent could accompany Mr F’s son on the walk to school.
7. Unhappy with the outcome, Mr F complained to us. He said both parents work and are not available to accompany his son to school. He believes the Council is failing to fulfil its duties towards his son.
8. We do not decide whether the Council should provide transport for Mr F’s son. This is the Council’s job. Our role is to check the Council made its decision properly. We check the Council followed relevant legislation, Government guidance and Council policies. We check the Council took account of all relevant information, and its decision making was fair. We cannot question Council decisions made without fault, no matter how strongly Mr F disagrees. We are not another appeal.
9. Government guidance says a child will not normally be eligible for transport because their parents’ work commitments mean they are unable to accompany them on the journey to school.
10. The evidence Mr F provided shows the Council has followed Government guidance. The Council considered both parents’ work commitments, and their need to take their other child to school.
11. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making to justify an investigation. This means we cannot achieve the outcome Mr F wants. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. We cannot achieve the outcome Mr F wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman