Summary: During our investigation the Council has accepted fault in how it considered Mrs X’s application for post-19 home to college transport. It has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment for Mrs X’s time and trouble, reconsider the decision and consider a financial remedy. As these actions remedy the injustice caused, and we cannot achieve any further worthwhile outcome, we will complete our investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains on behalf of her disabled adult daughter, Miss Y, that the Council refused to provide free home to college post-19 transport.
2. Mrs X says this has caused inconvenience and distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
4. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. It is not our role to decide whether the Council should provide support with transport under a Council's policy; that is the Council's responsibility. We investigate the processes a council followed in its consideration of an application or appeal, to assess whether it made its decision properly. If we find fault in the process, we may ask the Council to take the decision again.
5. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
9. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

What happened

10. Miss Y had received council-arranged transport to her special school up to the end of Year 14.
11. Mrs X applied for transport for Year 15 in Spring 2025 as Miss Y was moving to a college setting for 2025/6. The Council decided Miss Y was eligible under its policy and the nature of the support offered was a personal travel allowance (PTA) of £1000 per year so the family could make their own arrangements.
12. Mrs X appealed this decision. Mrs X did consider a PTA suitable because Miss Y could not travel independently and, due to work and caring commitments, neither parent was available to transport her.
13. The stage one appeal upheld the Council’s decision. Mrs X appealed to stage two, an appeal panel.
14. The appeal panel was not heard until Autumn 2025; the Council extended the existing transport arrangements until the appeal was heard.
15. The panel decided that as Miss Y’s father had flexibility when to work, he could arrange this around supporting Miss Y attend college, and the family could use the PTA to fund travel on days when family were not able to support Miss Y.

Relevant law and guidance

16. Section 508F of the Education Act 1996 requires local authorities to make transport arrangements they consider “necessary” to facilitate the attendance of relevant young adults at institutions where the local authority has secured the provision of education for the adult concerned. Relevant young adult means an adult who is under 25 years old (not a child or a pupil of sixth form age) for whom an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan is maintained.
17. When a council finds it is “necessary” to arrange transport for the young adult under section 508F, then the transport arranged must be free of charge (Education Act 1996, section 508F(4)). In deciding whether the council is required to make arrangements because it is “necessary”, the council must have regard to (among other things) the age of the adult and the nature of the route which the adult could reasonably be expected to take.
18. Councils must also take into account the “post-16 transport and travel support to education and training statutory guidance 2019” (the statutory guidance). The guidance says, “the overall intention of the adult transport duty is to ensure that those with the most severe disabilities with no other means of transportation are able to undertake further education and training after their 19th birthday to help them move towards more independent living”.
19. In Staffordshire County Council v JM (SEN): [2016] UKUT 246 (AAC), a post-19 case, the Courts said while Councils have discretion as to when it is necessary to provide support, “This is not a pure discretion. Although the question of what is necessary is a matter for them, in deciding that question they must exercise their judgment judiciously and in good faith”.
20. In (R (on the application of S) v Edu Action (Waltham Forest) [2006] EWHC 3144 (Admin) the Court considered the issue of parents having to accompany post-16 pupils. It said “there is no absolute rule that the parents of children over 16 who cannot travel to school on their own are expected to take them. What parents can be expected to do will depend on their circumstances. There will be cases where it is not reasonable to expect them to drive a child to school. Each case will turn on its facts.” The Court set out relevant considerations councils should consider, including the effect of proposed arrangements on the pupil, the parent, and the cost.
21. Councils should have an appeals process in place for parents who want to appeal about the eligibility of their child for travel support. The statutory guidance recommends councils adopt the following appeals process:

• Stage one: review by a senior officer; and
• Stage two: an independent appeal panel to consider written and verbal representations, a detailed decision is sent setting out: the nature of the decision reached; how the review was conducted; what factors were considered; the rationale for the decision reached; and information about complaining to us.

22. The Ombudsman’s expectation is that in deciding whether to provide support, or in considering the type of support to offer, the Council should be able to demonstrate how it has satisfied itself there is a safe, practicable and affordable way for the student to attend.

Council’s policy

23. The Council’s 2025-6 transport policy provides assistance to students aged 16 to 25 who have a learning difficulty or disability and,
• Have an EHC Plan and attend the college named in the Plan, and
• Live more than three miles from college, and
• Attend for at least twelve hours guided learning per week.
24. Eligible pupils will receive assistance depending on the level of transport need which may be:
• A free public transport pass
• Independent travel training
• An annual PTA to enable families to make their own arrangements, or
• Transport if exceptional circumstance criteria are met, for example:
1. Due to complexity of medical needs or special educational needs and disability,
2. Where it is the most efficient use of council resources,
3. Where it is considered by the Council to be in the best interests of the young person (for example where this is a safeguarding risk or it is not reasonably practicable to access education if no arrangements were made),
4. The availability / logistics of independent travel options.

Complaint handling

25. The Ombudsman has recently considered some other post-16 transport complaints for this Council and made service improvement recommendations. This has led the Council to reflect on this complaint.
26. In response to my enquiries the Council told me it accepts it did not fully explore what method of transport Miss Y would take and what the cost would be to the family having regard to affordability, this could not be evidenced in the decision letter.
27. The Council says it acknowledges its records could include more comprehensive detail regarding the legislative framework and its application to support families’ understanding, but it does not consider this omission has resulted in injustice.
28. The Council says following an internal review of the first year of its new policy implementation it has committed to redesign application forms to better capture families’ financial circumstances and personal situations. Additionally, it will develop a concise, one-page guidance document for panel members summarising relevant transport and legislative policy information in an accessible format. Outcome letters will in future explicitly refer to ‘practicable’ and ‘affordable’ criteria to enhance transparency for families regarding panel decisions and their underlying rationale, thereby reducing ambiguity.
29. The Council says it will write to Mrs X to apologise for any inconvenience caused for not considering all relevant factors in her case and offer a symbolic payment of £200 in recognition of any distress, time, and inconvenience experienced. It says it will confirm to Mrs X in writing that Miss Y’s case will be reconsidered at Stage two by a new panel, and it will endeavour to issue a new decision within four weeks of correspondence.
30. The Council says it will seek to ascertain any transport costs incurred by the family since January 2026. The family will be asked to provide relevant information and receipts; should these expenses exceed the PTA award, the Council will reimburse the shortfall.
31. The Council says it will contact Miss Y’s college to review her attendance from September to date and assess if there has been any impact following the ending of provided transport in January 2026. If appropriate, the Council will review the symbolic payment and consider a further financial remedy to reflect any identified impact.

Analysis

32. During this investigation the Council has itself identified fault in the way it considered Mrs X’s application. It has set out actions above to remedy the injustice caused which are in line with what we would recommend when we find fault in a transport complaint.
33. There is no need for us to investigate further as the Council has accepted fault and set out satisfactory actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Agreed Action

34. Within one month of our final decision, the Council will apologise to Mrs X for the impact of the fault. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making its apology.
35. Within one month of our final decision the Council will pay Ms X £200 for the avoidable distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by needing to repeat the appeal.
36. Within one month of our final decision the Council will:
• Confirm to Mrs X that it will reconsider her application afresh, with no involvement from staff/ panel members involved previously, and hold the appeal within four weeks of receiving information from the college or any additional representations from Mrs X;
• properly consider all evidence and representations from Mrs X, have due regard to the law, statutory guidance and its own policy for post-19 pupils, and properly record and explain the reasons for its decision.
37. If the Council makes a different decision or finds Mrs X’s costs have exceeded the PTA provided it will consider a financial remedy. If Mrs X and the Council cannot agree a remedy, Mrs X can bring this matter back to the Ombudsman.
38. We have received similar complaints and made recommendations for service improvements in those cases which the Council has accepted, I therefore do not need to repeat these.
39. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

40. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman