Surrey County Council

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about school transport because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

Ms X complains the Council refused her application and appeal for home to school transport for her daughter. She is unhappy with the Council’s handling of her request and subsequent complaint.

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)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Ms X’s daughter attends a secondary school less than two miles from her home.

The Council refused Ms X’s application for home to school transport because the school is less than the statutory walking distance. This is the distance the Government considers it reasonable for a child to walk to school, accompanied as necessary.

Ms X appealed the decision. She says she is not available to accompany her daughter and she does not consider the route to be safe for her daughter to walk alone.

I have carefully considered everything Ms X said, but I have not included all the details here to ensure Ms X and her daughter remain anonymous.

The Council considered Ms X’s appeal at both stages of its appeals process. A team from the Council walked the route from Ms X’s home to the school and assessed its safety using recognised guidelines. The Council considers the route safe for a child to walk, accompanied as necessary. The Council noted Ms X had other caring responsibilities, but does not consider these justify providing transport for her daughter.

The Ombudsman is not another appeal. We do not decide whether the Council should provide transport for Ms X’s daughter. This is the Council’s job. Our role is to check the Council made its decision properly. We cannot question Council decisions made without fault, no matter how strongly Ms X disagrees.

The Council considered the reasons Ms X requested transport and explained why it did not agree. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

In any event, there are alternative routes Ms X’s daughter could walk with pavements and streetlighting to avoid the sections of the route she considers to be unsafe which are still less than the statutory walking distance.

We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her request and response to her complaint. It would not be a good use of our limited resources.

Final decision

We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman