Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that the walking route to her child, Y’s, school is safe and that Y is no longer eligible for home to school transport. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has not properly assessed the walking route to her child, Y’s school before deciding it is safe. She says this decision and the subsequent decision to withdraw Y’s home to school transport puts her child’s safety at risk. She also says the Council has refused to accept a complaint about the matter. She wants to Council to reassess the safety of the walking route and if it is deemed unsafe, provide her child with home to school transport.

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))

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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
• 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.
7. As part of the Ms X’s appeal, the Council considered the safety of the walking route. Council members walked the route and considered the potential safety hazards, as set out in its home to school transport policy. It decided the walking route was safe, taking into account that, if necessary, the child could be accompanied along the route by a parent.
8. The Council also considered Ms X’s personal circumstances and why it would be difficult for her to accompany Y to school. It did not consider there was sufficient grounds to depart from its policy.
9. 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.
10. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has considered the safety of the walking route and decided that it is safe, taking into account the expectation that a parent will accompany the child, if necessary. Although I accept Ms X disagrees with this decision, I am satisfied the Council has appropriately considered the matter and the decision appears in line with its policy and government guidance. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it has considered the matter, so we cannot question the outcome.
11. In line with the statutory guidance, the Council also appropriately considered Ms X’s personal circumstances and whether there was a good reason to depart from its policy. It decided there were no exceptional circumstances so it would not provide transport in this case. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council has considered the matter and reached its decisions so we will not investigate.
12. We will also not investigate the Council’s refusal to accept a complaint about the matter. The Council’s complaints policy says it will not accept a complaint where there is an appropriate alternative route for a complaint to be raised ie. through an appeals panel or tribunal. The Council has considered Ms X’s complaint though its school transport appeals process, so this decision appears in line with its policy.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman