Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to divert a bus route to include a specific area which would allow school children to catch the bus. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s decision not to divert a bus route to include a specific area. She says if the route was extended, this would allow school children to catch this public bus, rather than having to use a school bus service, which would save money.

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 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 the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X’s children currently use a school bus service. She asked the Council to extend a bus route to cover a particular area. She said this would enable her children to catch this service and save her money as the fares for public buses are cheaper than the school bus service.
7. The Council considered Miss X’s request but explained diverting the service to include the area Miss X would like served would require additional resources as the current timetable was tight and could not accommodate the diversion. The Council said there was no additional funding available to fund this.
8. The Council also confirmed it would ask the bus operator whether it would be possible to provide a service to the area at no extra cost to the Council or whether it could adjust the current timetable for the bus service to better fit with school times.
9. 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 the complainant disagrees with the decision made.
10. In this case, the Council properly considered Miss X’s request and provided a clear rationale as to why it is not possible to change the bus route. The Council also took appropriate steps to explore other options to try and achieve the outcomes Miss X wants.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman