Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Suffolk County Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 22-007-724 Sector Education Category School Transport Decided 22 September 2022

View Suffolk County Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the decision to refuse the complainant’s application for school transport assistance. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr B. complains that the Council is at fault in refusing his application and appeal for school transport assistance for his son.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Mr B applied for school transport assistance for his son’s journey to secondary school. The Council refused the application because the family home is within the statutory walking distance from the school. Mr B used his right to appeal against the decision on the grounds that the walking route to the school is unsafe.

The appeal panel which considered the matter found the route to be safe. It therefore refused the appeal. Mr B believes the Council was at fault in that it failed to walk the entire route. He has provided new evidence which he contends shows that part of the route is unsafe.

It is not for the Ombudsman to take a view on the safety or other wise of the route. Neither is it for us to speculate on whether new information would have led to a different outcome. Rather, it is to consider whether there is evidence of fault on the appeal panel’s part. There is no such evidence.

The appeal panel considered both a detailed report on the route from the Council and evidence provided in response by Mr B. Both parties were afforded the opportunity to provide evidence to the appeal panel and there is no evidence of fault in the way it was considered. The decision the panel made is defensible on the basis of the evidence before it. In the absence of evidence of fault in how the appeal panel made the decision, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision or intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Suffolk County Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-007-186 Upheld
25-016-782 Upheld
25-018-428 Other
25-015-722 Other
25-014-130 Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation