The complaint
The complainant, I shall call Miss B, complains about the Council’s decision not to provide her children with free transport to school.
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)) We cannot question whether an organisation’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Miss B and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss B asked the Council to provide her children with free transport to primary school. The Council refused her application because the children are not attending the closest school to their home.
Councils must apply their transport policy when deciding entitlement to transport assistance. But they also have the discretion to consider exceptional circumstances. They must have a review or appeal process by which to do so.
Miss X appealed the Council’s decision and provided information in support of her appeal. She explained she had to withdraw her eldest child from her original school because of problems. She also advised she has health problems making it too difficult for her to walk. She also said her children have problems walking.
A panel of councillors considered Miss X’s appeal at the second stage of the Council’s process. The Council’s representative explained the children had been offered places at a school closer to their home, but Miss B had exercised parental choice to send them to the school they are attending.
The Council’s policy provides free transport to the designated school, or the closest school, if it is over 3 miles for children over eight years old; or two miles for children under eight years old. This does not apply to Mrs X’s application. It was Mrs X’s decision to send her children to their current school which is not the closest to their home. Therefore, they do not qualify for free transport.
The panel considered the information provided by Miss B. It decided the Council had properly applied its policy and there were no reasons to make an exception to its published policy.
Miss X disagrees with the panel’s decision. But this is not evidence of fault. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body, and we cannot criticise a properly made decision or intervene to substitute an alternative view. As I explain in paragraph 3, we can only criticise a council’s decision if there was fault in the way it was reached.
The Council has applied its transport policy and there is no indication of fault in the way it did so. Appeal panels are entitled to make their own judgements on the information before them. They need to look at each case on its merits.
The evidence available shows the panel reached a decision it was entitled to, considering the information it was presented with. It explained its decision to Miss B. Based on the evidence available, it is unlikely an investigation would find fault with the way the Council has acted.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and so we cannot question the merits of its decisions.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman