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 for us to question its decision.

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. Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decision her son is not eligible for transport because the walk to school is safe for an accompanied child.

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 and the Council.
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. The Council refused Mrs X’s application. It said the walk to school was just over two miles – so below the statutory walking distance. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision and said the walk was not safe. The Council arranged for the route to be assessed. This found the route to be safe for an accompanied child, and the Council refused Mrs X’s initial appeal.
10. A panel of councillors considered Mrs X’s appeal at the final stage of the Council’s process. In her appeal Mrs X:
• Explained Y would have to leave home at 07.15 – so the assessment caried out at 08.15 was not representative.
• Provided photographs which showed part of the route was prone to flooding.
• Explained there was a lack of lighting and parts of the route lacked tarmac paths.
• Said she and Y’s father worked so could not accompany Y.
• If Y did walk to school, they would arrive dirty because of the nature of the route.
11. During the appeal a member of the Road Safety Team talked through the assessment. There was a chance for questions.
12. The panel considered all the information presented. It decided the Council’s policy had been properly applied and the route had been assessed and deemed safe for an accompanied child. The panel decided there were no exceptional circumstances warranting free transport. It refused Mrs X’s appeal.

Assessment

13. We will not start an investigation into Mrs X’s complaint.
14. 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.
15. In this case, the Council’s original decision was based around the fact the distance from home to school is less than the statutory walking distance and considered safe for an accompanied child. This meant Y was not eligible for transport. There is no evidence of fault in the original decision.
16. The Council then followed the proper process to consider Mrs X’s application and appeals. This included an assessment of the route. While I know Mrs X disagrees with the assessment, it is not our role to question decisions of professional judgment unless there is fault in how they were reached. There is not enough evidence of fault in the assessment for us to question it.
17. Mrs X then had a chance to take part in the appeals process. At stage 2, the panel 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. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman