Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about arrangements for her child’s school transport. There is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision to change Y’s transport provider, it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome and we could not achieve what Ms X wants.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council changed the arrangements for her child, Y’s, home to school transport without notice and has refused to reinstate the previous arrangements following her complaint about the matter. She says this change has caused distress, inconvenience and financial loss. She wants the Council to apologise, reinstate her child’s place on his previous transport and compensate her for financial loss and the distress caused.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(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. In its complaint response, the Council upheld her complaint that it had failed to give her notice of the change to Y’s transport arrangements before the start of the Autumn 2025 school term. It apologised for the distress caused by this. It agreed to pay her travel costs for the first day of term. It said it would not reimburse any further travel costs as from the following day, it had put alternative transport arrangements in place for Y. It said it was Ms X’s choice not to accept these alternative arrangements and to transport Y to school herself.
7. It said it had needed to change Y’s transport provider due to safety concerns. It said it remained open to Ms X to accept the transport offered.
8. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has upheld her complaint that it failed to provide notice of the change and apologised to her for this. It committed to investigating what happened to prevent recurrence of the fault. These are appropriate actions to remedy the injustice caused and it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome on this point.
9. It is for the Council to ensure the travel arrangements in place are suitable and meet the needs of the child. Following a risk assessment and safety concerns, the Council decided it needed to change Y’s transport provider. Although I acknowledge that Ms X does not agree with the Council’s conclusions or the alternative transport offered, I am satisfied the Council has appropriately considered the matter and that it has sufficiently explained its decision making to Ms X. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how it reached the decision to warrant an investigation. We could not require the Council to reinstate Y’s place on his previous transport and so could not achieve the outcome she wants.
10. Ms X also complained she was denied the right to appeal against the new transport arrangements. The Council explained to her that its school transport appeals process was for disagreements about the mode of transport assistance offered, not for disagreements about the transport provider. This position appears in line with its stated policy, so we will not investigate this.
11. Ms X also complains about poor complaints handling. We will not investigate this as it is not a good use of our resources to investigate complaints handling, when we decide not to investigate the substantive matter.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision to change Y’s transport provider, it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome and we could not achieve what Ms X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman