Essex County Council

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs 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

Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse school travel assistance for her child. She says the decision did not properly consider her child’s circumstances, the medical evidence or the suitability of the nearer school.

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 considered information provided by Mrs X.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Councils must provide free school travel assistance for children who meet the eligibility criteria under the Home to School Travel Statutory Guidance (the Statutory Guidance). One of those criteria is that the child attends their nearest suitable school.

For school travel purposes, the nearest suitable school is one that is appropriate for the child's age, aptitude and any special educational needs. It does not mean the school that is most suitable or preferred, and schools are able to meet a wide range of needs. The nearest school to the child’s home will generally always be the nearest suitable school, provided it would be able to admit them.

Councils can exercise their discretion to provide school travel assistance for children who are not eligible. It is for each council to decide whether and how to exercise their discretionary power.

Assessment The Council decided that Mrs X’s child was not eligible for school travel assistance because they did not attend their nearest suitable school. The decision shows the Council considered her child’s medical needs but determined that the nearer school could also manage their needs.

The Council also considered whether there were exceptional circumstances to award school travel assistance. The decision shows the Council considered the child’s medical needs and the impact on the child’s schooling and support network. It determined there were no exceptional reasons to award discretionary travel in the circumstances.

There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify us investigating. The evidence I have seen shows the Council considered relevant information against the statutory eligibility criteria and considered whether there were grounds to exercise its discretion. It was entitled to reach the decision it did. Where there is not enough evidence of fault in how a council has reached its decision, we cannot question the merits of that decision.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman