Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council (24 023 246)

Report Upheld School transport 10-Feb-2026

Summary: The Council failed to decide if it was “necessary” to provide appropriate free transport to enable Ms X’s adult daughter, Miss Y, to attend the college named in her Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. It confused matters for adult learners, like Miss Y, who began their course after the age of 19, with the education transport rules for sixth form students. The Council’s amended Transport Policy 2024/2025 was not in line with the Education Act 1996 or case law for 19–25 year old learners with an EHC Plan. The faults caused Ms X avoidable frustration, avoidable time and trouble and uncertainty to her and Miss Y.

Surrey County Council (25 011 022)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 06-Jan-2026

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s consultation into changes to its post-16 transport policy. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Coventry City Council (25 010 860)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 06-Jan-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Mrs X’s application for free home-to-school transport for her child. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Cornwall Council (25 008 295)

Statement Upheld School transport 05-Jan-2026

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to deal with his late appeal against its decision to reject school travel assistance for his child. This is because the Council has agreed to consider Mr X’s appeal and amend its policy so it can consider late appeals in certain circumstances. Therefore, an investigation by us would not be proportionate.

Bedford Borough Council (25 002 931)

Statement Not upheld School transport 02-Jan-2026

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint. Ms X has used a right of appeal, so this is not an issue the Ombudsman can deal with.

Manchester City Council (25 006 137)

Statement Upheld School transport 02-Jan-2026

Summary: There was fault in the way the Council considered Mr X’s application for post-16 transport assistance. The Council confused the law and policy for pre and post 16 pupils and this casts doubt on the accuracy of the decision made. The Council has agreed to review the decision, apologise, make a symbolic payment to acknowledge the faults in the appeal process, and make service improvements.

Derbyshire County Council (25 010 862)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 18-Dec-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to remove the complainant’s son’s entitlement to school transport. Our intervention would not lead to a different outcome and is not therefore warranted.

London Borough of Enfield (25 008 541)

Statement Upheld School transport 17-Dec-2025

Summary: The Ombudsman completed an investigation into the Council handling of education transport. We asked the Council questions about the widespread impact of its policy. The Council was at fault. Its policy does not detail a parent must agree to a personal transport budget. The Council agreed to amend its policy and factsheet to confirm a parent must agree to any alternative arrangements for education transport.

Nottinghamshire County Council (25 003 787)

Statement Not upheld School transport 15-Dec-2025

Summary: There was no fault in the Council’s decision to decline to reimburse Ms X for taxi journeys out of its school transport budget. It was entitled to ask Ms X to first provide evidence about the taxi service that was used.

Leeds City Council (25 009 325)

Statement Upheld School transport 10-Dec-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s school transport service. This is because we are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken, or proposes to take.