Summary: Ms M withdrew her daughter, G, from school transport and raised concerns with the Council’s SEN transport team following an incident in September 2023. The Council investigated Ms M’s concerns and eventually offered alternative transport, but its response lacked urgency. We have recommended a symbolic remedy.

The complaint

1. Ms M complains about the Council’s response to problems with her daughter G’s school transport.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 injustice we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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)
4. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered information provided by Ms M and the Council. I invited Ms M and the Council to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Ms M’s daughter, G, attends a special school. The Council provides transport. G travels to school by taxi with an escort.
7. There was an incident when the taxi came to collect G on Monday 18 September 2023. G was unable to fasten her seatbelt. Ms M says the escort, who offered no help, was sitting on the seatbelt buckle. Ms M asked the escort to move so G could fasten her seatbelt. Ms M says the escort and the driver then became aggressive. Ms M removed G from the taxi. She reported the incident to the taxi operator who refused to send a different taxi. G did not go to school.
8. Ms M says G told her she had been struggling to fasten her seatbelt in the taxi since the beginning of term in September 2023.
9. Ms M raised her concerns with the Council’s SEN transport team. She says the Council had a conversation with the contractor and reminded them of their responsibilities. The Council asked Ms M if she would be willing to give the company ‘another chance’. Ms M declined. She said she had lost trust in the company. The Council advised Ms M to make a formal complaint.
10. Ms M asked the Council to arrange alternative transport for G. She says the Council offered a mileage allowance to transport G herself which she declined.
11. Ms M made a formal complaint to the Council on 21 September 2023. She also made a safeguarding referral.
12. The Council acknowledged receipt of Ms M’s complaint on 29 September 2023.
13. The matter was referred to a senior officer with responsibility for transport. From internal correspondence at the end of November 2023, when Ms M chased the Council for a response to her complaint, it appears G was not attending school regularly; the school was providing limited transport to reintegrate her to lessons; and the Council was looking to arrange an alternative contractor from the beginning of January 2024.
14. Unhappy with the Council’s response, Ms M contacted the Ombudsman. We advised her to ask the Council to respond at the second stage of its complaints process.
15. The Council sent a response on 12 April 2024. The Council’s response says there were “conflicting accounts” of the incident on 18 September 2023. The Council noted Ms M did not wish to continue using the same operator. The Council said it did not propose an alternative operator “due to the fact there was conflicting information”. Nevertheless, the Council said it wanted to resolve the situation by providing transport and learning from the situation.
16. The Council proposed an “emergency tender” to arrange a taxi to the school for the remainder of the summer term. This was in anticipation of G attending a new site the school was in the process of opening, subject to approval by the regulator, and subject to the school arranging transport from its main site to the new site.
17. Unhappy with the outcome, Ms M complained to us.

Consideration

18. Something happened on the morning of 18 September 2023 when the taxi came to collect G and the result was that Ms M no longer trusted the taxi driver and escort to take her daughter to school.
19. My job is to consider the Council’s response. I do not investigate the incident itself. That was the Council’s job.
20. In its response to my enquiries, the Council explained the actions it had taken following the incident.
21. The Council said the operator held a formal meeting with the driver and escort to remind them of the Council’s expectations.
22. The Council acknowledged there are only verbal accounts of this meeting taking place and the discussions held. The Council said its compliance team should have interviewed the operator, taken statements and outlined the Council’s expectations. The Council accepted this was a learning point for the future.
23. The Council said the driver and escort had both worked on Council contracts for a number of years, transporting different children, and there had been no other incidents reported.
24. The Council is satisfied the driver and escort can continue to provide transport. This is a decision for the Council, not the Ombudsman.
25. Of concern to me, however, is the amount of time that passed between the incident on 18 September 2023, when G stopped using the transport, and the Council’s decision in late November to arrange alternative transport from the beginning of January 2024.
26. While there is no guidance and there are no regulations to say how quickly the Council should act, it seems wrong that a child should miss almost a whole term of education in these circumstances.
27. The Council appears to have been sympathetic to Ms M’s decision to remove G from the taxi and her request for an alternative provider.
28. I have not seen evidence the Council explained that Ms M would effectively lose transport if she did not agree to continue using the existing provider, for instance.
29. I would have expected the Council to act with more urgency to sort the problem out one way or another.
30. Where we find delay, we consider the impact on the complainant. We refer to this as the injustice. We may recommend a remedy for injustice that is the result of fault by the Council.
31. It appears things were not going entirely smoothly for G at school when she stopped using the transport. G’s school arranged some transport in an attempt to reintegrate her. The Council proposed a single-occupancy taxi to take G to school from the beginning of January 2024 but she did not want to return to the school and Ms M wanted her to attend a different school instead. The school Ms M wanted had not opened at the time, so Ms M agreed G would return to her old school but a different site.
32. From January 2024, G’s absence from school appears to have been the result of decisions about which school she should attend, not transport problems. My investigation concerns what happened until the Council offered transport for January 2024. Anything that happened after this is a new and different compliant.
33. The delay between September 2023 and January 2024 may have meant G missed school she would otherwise have attended. In the circumstances, it is difficult to say.
34. I recommended a remedy for the injustice this caused. The Council accepted my recommendations. The Council has agreed to undertake the actions set out below.

Back to top

Agreed action

35. We have published guidance to explain how we recommend remedies for people who have suffered injustice as a result of fault by a council. Our primary aim is to put people back in the position they would have been in if the fault by the Council had not occurred. When this is not possible, as in the case of Ms M and G, we may recommend the Council makes a symbolic payment.
36. Within six weeks of my final decision, the Council will:
• apologise to Ms M for the delay offering alternative transport; and
• offer a symbolic payment of £300 to acknowledge the impact.
37. The Council should send us evidence it has complied with the above actions.
38. We can also make recommendations to ensure similar faults do not happen in the future.
39. The Council has already recognised the need to take statements and keep a written record of any investigation. I did not, therefore, make further recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

40. I have completed my investigation as the Council accepted my recommendations.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman