The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse school travel assistance for her child. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify us investigating.
The complaint
Miss X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse school travel assistance for her child. She says her child cannot walk home safely without adult support. She says the decision fails to consider her family circumstances and her child’s safety needs.
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 person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue 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))
How I considered this complaint
I also considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Home to School Travel Assistance Statutory Guidance (the Statutory Guidance) says councils must provide travel assistance to eligible children who live in their area. A child may be eligible if they attend their nearest suitable school and: live more than the statutory walking distance from the school; could not reasonably be expected to walk to school because of their special educational needs, disability or other problem, even if accompanied by their parent; or could not reasonably be expected to walk to school in reasonable safety, even if accompanied by their parent.
The evidence I have seen shows the Council considered the statutory factors and the child’s special educational needs, medical conditions and familial circumstances. It decided the child was not eligible for school travel assistance because they lived within the statutory walking distance of their nearest suitable school and could reasonably be accompanied by a parent or older sibling.
Ms X says the Council failed to consider the parent’s work responsibilities, which make it difficult to accompany the child. The Statutory Guidance says that where a council considers whether a parent can accompany their child, it should consider the family's individual circumstances and whether there are good reasons the parent cannot do so, such as a disability or mobility problem. However, a parent's working pattern or other caring responsibilities will not normally be regarded as sufficient reasons why they cannot accompany their child.
The evidence I have seen shows the Council considered relevant information and made a decision it was entitled to. While I acknowledge the parent’s work responsibilities may make it difficult to accompany the child, the Statutory Guidance does not normally regard this as sufficient reason to provide travel assistance. As there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, we cannot question the outcome.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman