Summary: Miss Y complains about the Council’s decision to place her son into a shared taxi which transports him from home to school. She says this decision had a direct impact on her son’s health due to the longer journey times and the increased exposure to infection from other passengers. The Council wrongly treated Miss Y’s concerns as a complaint and did not use the appeal process. This was contrary to its own policy and statutory guidance. The Council has agreed to apologise and arrange an appeal of D’s case.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains the Council unreasonably refused her request for a change to the type of school transport it provides for her son. Miss Y says her son requires an individual taxi to limit his exposure to infection and to access regular toilet breaks due to his chronic medical conditions.
2. Miss Y says the Council’s decision will have a negative impact on her son’s health and education.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Miss Y and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Miss Y and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
7. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

School transport appeal process

8. The Education Act 1996 says councils must provide free school transport to eligible children. The term ‘eligible’ means children of compulsory school age who meet certain criteria.
9. Local authorities must publish general arrangements and policies in respect of home to school travel and transport for children of compulsory school age. Councils are required to publish a complaints or appeals procedure as part of the transport policy statement.
10. The statutory government guidance ‘Home to School Travel’ recommends councils adopt the following appeals process.
• Stage 1: Review by a senior officer. Within 20 working days of receiving a parent’s written request to appeal the decision, a senior officer reviews the original decision and sends the parent a detailed written notification of the outcome of the review setting out the nature of the decision, how the review was conducted, what was taken into account, the rationale for the decision reached, and how to escalate their case to stage 2.
• Stage 2: Within 40 working days of receipt of the parent’s request for an independent appeal panel to consider written and verbal representations, a detailed decision is sent setting out: the nature of the decision reached; how the review was conducted; what factors were considered; the rationale for the decision reached; and information about appealing to us.
11. The Council’s policy ‘Travel Assistance for Children and Young People (0-25 years) Living in Harrow’ sets out the difference between a complaint and an appeal. It says, “a complaint is about the way the process has been managed or the way you have been treated in the process”. It goes on to say, “the appeal process is in two stages and should be used by parents/carers who wish to challenge a decision about the transport arrangements offered, the child’s eligibility, the distance measured in relation to statutory walking distances and the safety of the route”.
12. The Council’s policy sets out the two-stage appeals process, which is in accordance with the procedure recommended in the statutory guidance.

What happened

13. This section provides a summary of the key events relevant to the complaint and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
14. Miss Y’s son, who I will call D, has special educational needs (SEN) and attends the specialist school named in his Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP). D also has asthma and another chronic health condition which, on some days, causes him to use the toilet multiple times and with urgency.
15. D is eligible for transport assistance and receives taxi transport to school funded by the Council. Until September 2024, D was the only child present in the taxi. From September 2024 the Council changed the transport arrangements and placed D into a shared taxi with three other students.
16. Miss Y wrote to the Council on 30 September to raise concerns that D was the first child to be collected on the route which resulted in longer travel times of up to two hours. She said this significantly increased the likelihood of D needing to use the toilet during the journey.
17. A manager from the SEN transport team responded on 9 October 2024. In summary, the letter contained the following points.
• After checking with the transport provider, they confirmed that D’s previous taxi did not include scheduled bathroom stops and, “they had no concerns of this nature”. The Council said: “there is no evidence of any bathroom related incidents whilst on transport in the previous year or this current year”.
• The current taxi arrangements add 10 to 15 minutes on the total journey time when compared with a direct journey which is 17 miles with a travel time of 45-50 minutes. The other pick-up points are very close to D’s address and fall directly along the route to school, adding approximately 1.5 miles to the journey. The Council therefore deems the route as being reasonable.
• The Council agreed to work on reducing the likelihood of D experiencing an asthma flare-up by reviewing the vehicle’s ventilation.
18. Miss Y wrote to the Council again on 16 October 2024. A senior manager responded on 5 November 2024.
• Having carefully considered the supporting medical documentation and records from D’s schools the Council’s decision remains unchanged.
• There is no evidence of a failure in the service delivery during the last school year which would require a change in D’s transport provision.
• Roadworks and other unforeseen circumstances have sometimes impacted the duration of D’s journey. The transport provider is aware of this and will continue to minimise delays where possible.
• The direct distance from D’s home to school is 17.2 miles with an approximate journey time of 50 minutes. The time added with the pickup points is 1.5 miles and 10-15 miles. This is reasonable, cost-effective and the most efficient use of the Council’s resources.
• If D’s medical needs change, or other issues arise, the Council will review the situation again.
19. Dissatisfied with the Council’s decision, Miss Y approached her local MP and then the Ombudsman.

Was there fault in the Council’s actions causing injustice?

20. We expect councils to follow relevant statutory guidance unless there is good reason to depart from it. In Miss Y’s case, the Council asked a senior manager, rather than a panel of officers, to consider the second stage of her appeal. We find the Council departed from its own policy and the statutory guidance without good reason. This is fault. As a result, Miss Y has not had the benefit of receiving independent consideration of her case which a panel would have provided.
21. The statutory guidance states that applicants should be given the opportunity to make written and verbal representations to the appeal panel. The Council failed to give Miss Y this opportunity. This was fault. The fault caused uncertainty because we cannot say whether the Council was able to make an informed and robust decision about D’s transport.
22. The statutory guidance on a two-stage appeals procedure is to ensure a consistent approach across all local authorities and to provide an impartial second stage for cases that are not resolved at the first stage. As the Council failed to properly deal with Miss Y’s appeal, we cannot say what the outcome would have been if there had been proper consideration. The Council will now arrange for a properly constituted panel to consider Miss Y’s appeal.

Back to top

Action

23. Within four weeks of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• apologise in writing to Miss Y for the distress, uncertainty and frustration caused for failing to conduct the appeal process in line with statutory guidance. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how councils should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance when making the apology I have recommended.
• arrange an independent Stage 2 appeal panel to properly consider Miss Y’s appeal. The Council should also ensure Miss Y is allowed an opportunity to give verbal representations.
• if the appeal is upheld, and the decision is based on the same circumstances that applied at the time of the original stage two decision made by the Council on 5 November 2024, the Council should make a payment of £250 in recognition of the distress caused by the failure to reach this decision sooner.
24. Within eight weeks of our final decision, the Council will also:
• by training or other means remind staff of the importance of following the statutory appeal process guidance when dealing with school transport assistance.
25. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

26. I find fault causing injustice. The Council will implement the agreed actions to remedy the injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman