Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council refusing a personal transport budget for home to school transport as we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X says the Council should provide her with a personal transport budget for her child, Y’s, home to school transport. She says she is incurring fuel costs to take Y 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))
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 Miss X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Y has special educational needs but does not have an Education Health and Care Plan. Y attends a secondary mainstream school near their home. Miss X says the Council has provided a bus pass for the last three years. She applied for a personal transport budget to replace the bus pass. She says Y has never used the bus. Instead she and family members have driven Y to school.
7. The Council refused her application in April and then on internal appeal in May and June 2026. It said there was no evidence Y could not use the bus and therefore there was suitable transport available. It suggested Y attend the travel training it provides.
8. Miss X says she feels like the Council failed to consider Y’s welfare, safety and safeguarding needs. Miss X says she has another child to get to school and is finding it increasingly difficult to do so.

Analysis

9. A child will not normally be eligible for free travel to school because of their special educational needs, disability, or mobility problem, or because the route is unsafe, if they would be able to walk to school if they were accompanied.
10. A child will not normally be eligible solely because their parent’s work commitments or caring responsibilities mean they are unable to accompany their child. Councils must consider cases where the parent says there are good reasons they are unable to accompany their child, or make other suitable arrangements for their journey, and decide on the circumstances of each case.
11. Where the local authority determines that a child would be able to walk if they were accompanied, the general expectation is the parent will accompany them or make other suitable arrangements for their journey to and from school. (Department of Education, Travel to school for children of compulsory school age statutory guidance 2023, paragraphs 47 to 52)
12. Here the Council’s decision shows it considered the case and decided there was no evidence, other than Miss X’s word, that Y could not use the bus. It decided it was reasonable to expect Miss X to accompany Y to the bus stop if she did not believe Y was safe on their own.
13. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision. It has used a procedure which includes internal appeals and we are unlikely to say it has not considered the relevant facts. The decision does not appear flawed.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman