Recent statements in this category are shown below:
-
Essex County Council (25 021 530)
Report Upheld School transport 16-Sep-2026
Summary: Mrs K complained about her two children’s school transport including late and missed pick-ups, a lack of consistency, ignoring instructions to safeguard her children and about an incident when one of her children went missing. Both children have Education, Health and Care Plans.
-
Essex County Council (25 023 460)
Report Upheld School transport 16-Sep-2026
Summary: Mrs K complained about her two children’s school transport including late and missed pick-ups, a lack of consistency, ignoring instructions to safeguard her children and about an incident when one of her children went missing. Both children have Education, Health and Care Plans.
-
Essex County Council (25 016 267)
Statement Upheld School transport 01-Sep-2026
Summary: Miss X complained about transport arrangements made for her son (Y) by the Council. We found fault with the Council for its failure to carry out a risk assessment, make suitable transport arrangements and communicate with Miss X effectively. The Council’s fault caused injustice to Miss X as she had to take Y to school for six weeks after his exclusion from transport arranged by the Council. The Council has already offered reimbursement of Miss X’s travel expenses. The Council has also agreed to apologise and make a symbolic distress payment.
-
Buckinghamshire Council (25 025 266)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 01-Sep-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of post-16 transport. This is because an investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome. Data protection issues are best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office.
-
Surrey County Council (26 013 850)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 01-Sep-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide transport to school for Ms X’s child. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
-
London Borough of Newham (26 011 825)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 31-Aug-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a home to school transport application. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.
-
Birmingham City Council (25 027 514)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 31-Aug-2026
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her child’s school transport assistance application. This is because it was reasonable for her to ask the Council for an appeal by an independent panel.
-
Statement Upheld School transport 26-Aug-2026
Summary: We found fault with the Council limiting provision of transport to post-16 children based on whether a pre-existing route exists and has capacity, rather than considering the needs of the applicant. We also found fault with the Council not considering affordability when considering Personal Travel Payments. The Council agreed to update its policy, review its procedures and provide training to staff. The Council also agreed to apologise to Mrs X, provide a symbolic financial payment for the injustice its fault caused and reconsiders its travel assistance decision for Mrs X’s child.
-
Statement Upheld School transport 26-Aug-2026
Summary: We found fault with the Council limiting provision of transport to post-16 children based on whether a pre-existing route exists and has capacity, rather than considering the needs of the applicant. We also found fault with the Council not considering affordability when awarding Personal Travel Payments. The Council agreed to update its policy, review its procedures and provide training to staff. The Council also agreed to apologise to Mrs X, provide a symbolic financial payment for the injustice its fault caused and reconsider its travel assistance decision for Mrs X’s child.
-
Statement Upheld School transport 26-Aug-2026
Summary: We found fault with the Council for restricting access of post-19 learners to travel assistance to their first course of study. We also found fault with the Council failing to consider whether travel assistance was necessary for Mr Y. The Council agreed to update its policy, review its procedures and provide training to staff. The Council also agreed to apologise to Ms X and Mr Y and provide a symbolic financial payment for the injustice its fault caused.