Summary: Mrs X complains the Council removed a Personal Transport Budget (PTB) for her son without notice in October 2022. Mrs X says it took the Council five months to reinstate the PTB. Mrs X also complains the Council failed to respond to her complaint about this. The Council has acknowledged there was a delay and it took four months to complete the review of the PTB. We have found further fault with the Council’s request for medical evidence and complaint handling. To remedy the injustice caused to Mrs X the Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment and service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council removed a Personal Transport Budget (PTB) for her son, Y, without notice in October 2022. Mrs X says it took the Council five months to reinstate the budget. Mrs X also complains the Council failed to respond to her complaint about this.
2. Mrs X says this has caused the family significant inconvenience, distress and time and trouble.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information Mrs X provided and discussed the complaint with her. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its response.
6. Mrs X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered all comments before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s Personal Transport Budget Policy (PTB)

7. The policy sets out that:

• PTB is available to children who have an Education and Health Care (EHC) Plan and have been assessed as eligible to receive home to school transport;
• PTB is granted at the discretion of the Council;
• before granting a PTB the Council will investigate whether there is any transport currently in place that the child could be placed onto at a lower cost than providing a PTB;
• PTB assessments are solely based on whether they are cost effective for the Council. If it is not cost effective for the Council to provide a PTB, it will not be granted even if it is the preferred method of receiving transport assistance; and
• students that are eligible for free school transport but for whom a PTB is not cost effective will be allocated to the most appropriate alternative form of transport assistance instead.

8. The policy set outs the review process as follows:

• parents should notify the Council of a change in circumstances, including moving address, no later than 28 days before the change us due to take place. A child’s eligibility to receive a PTB would then be reassessed and a PTB is not guaranteed to continue because one was previously provided. The PTB assessment will be made on the current circumstances and the alternative transport available at the time. Any transport arrangements that are required after the change but before the child has been reassessed will be the parent’s responsibility to arrange;
• where a PTB has been refused, there is no appeal however parents can request a review of the decision; and
• the review will be completed within 28 days. Where parents present additional information for consideration during the review, an outcome will be provided within 28 days of any new information being received.

9. The policy sets out the process for backdating PTB payments as follows:

• if the review highlights that parents received an incorrect PTB assessment, a PTB will be provided and payments will be backdated to the original decision date or six weeks after the initial application was received, whichever is earlier;
• if the review overturns the decision as a result of additional information that the parent did not make available when first applying, a PTB will be provided, and payments will start from the date the parental agreement is returned; and
• where the review is completed after the 28 day limit, payment will be calculated from 28 days after any new information was received.

What happened

10. Below is a brief chronology of key events. It is not meant to show everything that happened.
11. In March 2021, the Council agreed a PTB for Y’s parents to transport him to and from school. The Council agreed to the PTB as it was cost effective to the Council.
12. On 15 October 2022, Mrs X moved home. Mrs X informed the Council of her new address on 27 October.
13. On 6 December, the Council acknowledged Mrs X change of address and explained that it had reassessed Y’s application for a PTB. The Council decided that Y could be placed onto an existing vehicle whose cost was less than the PTB. The Council said it could no longer continue to provide a PTB and it would be cancelled with immediate effect. The Council explained that Mrs X could request a review of the decision and provide any additional supporting information in support of her application.
14. The Council also explained that because Y was eligible for free home to school transport, its client transport team would contact Mrs X in due course about how the new transport arrangements would be implemented.
15. Mrs X responded on the same day and asked the Council to explain its decision. Mrs X said their new home was only two miles from their previous address. Mrs X said there was no option for public transport and Y was too anxious to get a taxi and therefore would not be able to attend school. The Council did not respond to Mrs X.
16. On 11 January 2023, Mrs X contacted the Council and said it had failed to respond to her and she had not heard anything more about her appeal.
17. On 13 January, the Council wrote to Mrs X and apologised for the delay. It said that Mrs X did not inform the Council she had moved address until after she had moved. The Council explained that following the reassessment Y was no longer eligible for a PTB and it had to be cancelled with immediate effect. The Council said the cost of providing Y with a PTB exceeded the cost of arranging transport.
18. The Council acknowledged Mrs X’s comments that Y was unable to travel on hired transport with other students. But said it required supporting evidence, including medical evidence from a consultant explaining Y’s medical needs and the impact of travelling on hired transport.
19. Mrs X responded to the Council on the same day. She said Y had been diagnosed with autism and the PTB had been in place for 18 months. Mrs X said the Council had cancelled the PTB without alternative transport options in place. Mrs X explained Y would refuse to get into a taxi with adults and peers he did not know. Mrs X explained that Y suffered with high anxiety; had significant communication needs in terms of asking for help; extreme sensory needs; and oral motor fixation. Mrs X said that as his parents, they understood Y’s triggers and how to manage them. Mrs X said that the Council had at no point tried to discuss the matter with them in advance of making its decision to remove the PTB.
20. On 3 February, Mrs X complained to the Council about its decision to cancel the PTB and delay in the appeal process. Mrs X said she had provided the Council with the supporting evidence it requested, and Y’s sensory needs were highlighted in his EHC Plan. Mrs X said they had been without a PTB for three months and the Council had failed to provide any alternative options. Mrs X said she wanted Y’s PTB reinstated with immediate effect and backdated to November 2022.
21. On 10 February, Mrs X provided evidence from Y’s consultant.
22. On 20 February, the Council wrote to Mrs X and said it had reviewed the application and medical evidence. The Council informed Mrs X it had approved Y’s PTB. Mrs X signed and returned the parental agreement form on the same day.
23. On 3 April, the Council wrote to Mrs X and set out the PTB payments from April 2023, at the same rate as previously agreed in March 2021.
24. On 10 May, Mrs X complained to the Council again about a lack of communication since October 2022 and not having received a response to her previous complaints. Mrs X confirmed that they had received PTB from April 2023, but the Council had failed to acknowledge they were taking Y to and from school for five months. Mrs X requested a backdated payment of £1057.89.
25. On 13 June, the Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint. It said the PTB had already been backdated to 20 February 2023. However, the Council acknowledged there had been a significant delay in the review process and agreed to backdate the payment to October 2022, when the original PTB was cancelled.
26. On 21 July, Mrs X informed the Council that she had not received the backdated PTB payment. The Council said there had been an error in processing the payment and confirmed Mrs X would receive payment the following week.

Analysis

27. The Council has already acknowledged there was a delay and it took four months completing the review of Mrs X’s PTB application. As the Council has accepted fault, I do not intend to investigate this part of Mrs X’s complaint any further.
28. The Council asked Mrs X to provide evidence from a consultant explaining Y’s medical needs and the impact of travelling on hired transport. In response to my draft decision Mrs X queried why the Council did not give her the option to request this information from Y’s GP, in line with its policy. The Council said the use of the word consultant was intended as a catch all term for any medical consultant that was aware of Y’s medical needs. However, there is no evidence the Council explained this to Mrs X. This is fault. If the Council had explained this to Mrs X it is likely that she would have been able to provide the medical evidence much sooner rather than waiting to meet with Y’s consultant in February. I cannot say how much sooner but I am satisfied that Mrs X has suffered an injustice in the form of uncertainty about whether the PTB could have been reinstated earlier.
29. Following the review and Mrs X’s complaint, the Council agreed to a PTB for Y and backdated this payment to when the PTB was cancelled by the Council at the end of October 2022. I am satisfied the Council’s decision to backdate the payment to October 2022 remedies the injustice caused by the delay.
30. The Council failed to respond to Mrs X’s emails in a timely manner or did not respond to her at all. This poor communication would have caused Mrs X significant avoidable distress and frustration. Mrs X was put to the time and trouble of chasing and complaining to the Council. Whilst the Council wrote to Mrs X in February 2023, confirming the PTB had been approved, this was not a response to her complaint. If the Council had properly considered the complaint, it would have realised that Mrs X had requested the payments be backdated to November 2022. The Council was at fault in the way in handled Mrs X’s complaint and because of this Mrs X had to make a further complaint. This would have added to Mrs X’s distress.
31. I have considered whether the Council’s faults have caused an injustice to Y. Y’s parents were transporting him to and from school and therefore he was not directly impacted by the faults identified in this statement. Furthermore, while the Council failed to implement alternative transport arrangements, it was clear Mrs X would have considered the arrangements unsuitable for Y and would not have agreed to them. Therefore, I do not find Y has been caused an injustice in this case.
32. The Council has already recruited additional staff to ensure review request are dealt with within the timescales set out in its policy. I welcome this approach by the Council, and I am satisfied that this action will ensure similar delays do not arise in the future.

Back to top

Agreed action

33. Within one month of my final decision the Council will:
1. apologise to Mrs X;
2. pay Mrs X £350 for the distress caused by the faults identified in this statement; and
3. issue guidance to staff explaining that applicants should be advised of the options available for obtaining and submitting medical evidence in support of their PTB appeal.
34. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I have found fault by the Council causing an injustice to Mrs X. I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman