Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Kent County Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 23-020-661 Sector Education Category School Transport Decided 01 May 2024

View Kent County Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the standard of a Council bus service. Though the Council does acknowledge failings, there is insufficient evidence of a significant enough injustice being caused to the complainant to warrant a formal investigation.

The complaint

The complainant (Ms Y) complains on behalf of her young daughter (Child X) about the cleanliness of her bus to school. Ms Y also says the bus experiences occasional breakdowns and unexpected changes to the normal route. She explains the alleged fault causes Child X upset and is a safety concern. As a desired outcome, Ms Y wants the Council to improve the bus service.

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 impact on the complainant, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

The Council acknowledges the standard of the bus service has not been to the required level and it has referenced issues with staff shortages, unplanned roadworks and an increase in mechanical failures. There is therefore a likelihood of finding of fault were we to investigate. That said, though I recognise the issues the complainant raises, the alleged fault is limited to causing Ms Y and Child X occasional inconvenience. The claimed injustice Ms Y refers to about safety concerns is speculative as opposed to showing evidence of actual harm. I see no evidence of either her or Child X suffering serious loss, harm or distress by reason of cleanliness concerns, isolated breakdowns or rerouting. In my view, there is insufficient evidence of a significant enough injustice being caused to warrant an investigation.

Final decision

We will not investigate this complainant. There is insufficient evidence of a significant enough injustice being caused to warrant a formal investigation.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Kent County Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-016-851 Other
25-017-670 Other
25-018-135 Other
25-015-340 Other
25-007-298 Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation