The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal of free home-to-school transport for Ms X’s child. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.
The complaint
Ms X said the Council was at fault in the way it dealt with her appeal against its refusal of free home-to school transport for her child.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Councils with school transport responsibilities have a duty to provide free home-to school transport in some circumstances where a parent applies to their nearest qualifying school with places available. These are largely based on walking distance. There is no responsibility where a parent does not choose the nearest qualifying school.
Where council refuse free school transport, they must also offer a right of appeal and consider whether to offer discretionary free transport. We would expect an appeal hearing to consider the case a parent puts forward. If it does that, we cannot reach an alternative view.
Ms X did not apply to her nearest qualifying school with places available. Her child did not have an Education Health and Care Plan naming a school, so that meant her choice of a school several miles away was a personal matter and the Council had no transport duty.
Although Ms X was unhappy with the conduct of the appeal, the notes of the telephone hearing and the Council’s decision letter show the panel considered two possible grounds for exercising discretion to provide free home-to-school transport, but that it decided neither applied for reasons it laid out. It could do that, and I have no right to substitute another view of Ms X’s circumstances. Ms X’s different opinion and her view the panel should have reached a different decision is not evidence of fault.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify this.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman