Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council refusing to provide her child with free transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained the Council has refused to provide her son (Y) with free transport to school.

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

What I found

School transport

5. The Department for Education has produced statutory guidance for Councils to help understand their duties regarding school transport. The Guidance states councils have a duty to provide free transport to eligible children who attend their nearest suitable school and:
• live more than the statutory walking distance from that school, or
• who live within statutory walking distance of the school, but who cannot reasonably be expected to walk to that school because of their special educational needs, disability, or mobility problem (even if accompanied by their parent), or
• who live within walking distance of the school but would not be able to walk to that school in reasonable safety, even if they were accompanied by their parent.
6. The guidance states that for children of secondary school age the nearest secondary school to home will almost always be their nearest suitable school. The guidance states that it is reasonable for a local authority to expect parents to list their nearest school on their application form if they intend to apply for free travel to school. 
7. Councils also have powers to provide discretionary transport to children who are not eligible children.
8. Councils should have an appeals process for parents to challenge decisions about home to school transport.

Background

9. Mrs X asked the Council to provide Y with free transport to his secondary school (School C). The Council refused Mrs X’s application. It said School C was not the nearest suitable school to Mrs X’s home. It said School B was closer. This meant there was no entitlement to free transport to School C.
10. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision. Mrs X explained why she wanted Y to attend School C. Mrs X’s decision to send Y to School C was because it met his “medical and educational needs, as well has his religious requirements”. Mrs X explained that because of Y’s SEN he could not use public transport to travel to School C.
11. A senior officer considered Mrs X’s case at the final stage of the Council’s appeals process. The officer noted Mrs X had not applied for places at the two nearest secondary schools to her home – both of which are less than three miles away. School C was 12 miles away. Because Y was not attending the nearest suitable school there was no legal entitlement to school transport. The Council said this decision was in line with statutory guidance and its published policy. The Council considered all the points raised by Mrs X. It decided there was no legal requirement to provide transport or to use its discretion to do so.

Assessment

12. We will not start an investigation into Mrs X’s complaint.
13. 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 an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether a complainant disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
14. In this case, the Council’s original decision was based around the fact Y is not attending the nearest suitable school to home. The Council’s policy is also clear that if a parent applies for transport and did not apply for a place at a closer school, they will not be eligible for transport. The statutory guidance makes it clear this approach is acceptable and so it is not one we can question. I have not seen any evidence of fault in the Council’s original decision to refuse transport.
15. The Council then followed the proper process to consider Mrs X’s application and appeals. Mrs X had a chance to take part in the appeals process, and at stage 2, the officer considered all the information presented. The Council wrote to Mrs X and explained its decision. While I understand Mrs X is disappointed with the Council’s decision, there is not enough evidence of fault in how it was reached for us to become involved.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman