Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council’s decision to refuse her application for home to school transport assistance was unfair. The Council was at fault as it wrongly refused Mrs X’s application which caused avoidable distress and inconvenience to her. Mrs X also incurred costs in transporting her child to school. The Council agreed an appropriate remedy to Mrs X by offering transport assistance and refunding the costs incurred by her in transporting her child. The Council also agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment of £150 to Mrs X to acknowledge the distress and inconvenience caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained that the Council’s decision to refuse her application for home to school transport assistance for her child was unfair. This is because she was not aware that her third preference school was her nearest school based on previous information provided by the Council. Mrs X also considered she did not receive a fair hearing at the appeal panel as a member asked inappropriate and unfair questions which caused distress to her. Mrs X said that she may need to move her child to another school due to the Council’s decision to refuse her application.

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 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)
3. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
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 have:

• Considered the complaint and the information provided by Mrs X.
• Discussed the issues with Mrs X.
• Made enquiries of the Council and considered the information provided.
• Invited Mrs X and the Council to comment on the draft decision. I considered the comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

6. Local authorities must make suitable home to school travel arrangements as they consider necessary for ‘eligible children’ of compulsory school age to attend their ‘qualifying school’. The travel arrangements must be made and provided free of charge. The relevant qualifying school is the nearest school with places available that provides education appropriate to the age, ability and aptitude of the child, and any special educational needs the child may have. ‘Eligible children’ include:

• children living outside ‘statutory walking distance’ from the school (two miles for children under eight, three miles for children aged eight and above);
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot reasonably be expected to walk to school because of their special educational needs, disability or mobility problem;
• children living within walking distance of the school but who cannot walk to school because the route is unsafe; and
• children entitled on low-income grounds. (Education Act 1996, 508B(1) and Schedule 35B)

7. Councils should have an appeals process in place for parents who wish to appeal about the eligibility of their child for travel support. The Council has a two stage appeal procedure:

• Stage one is a review by an officer.
• Stage two is an appeal to the Transport Regulation Committee Appeals Panel.

8. The statutory guidance provides that where a child’s nearest school is oversubscribed and unable to offer a place, the nearest school with places available is their nearest suitable school for travel purposes.

What happened

9. The following is a summary of the key events relevant to my consideration of the complaint. It does not include everything that happened.

Application for home to school transport

10. Mrs X applied for a high school for her child, Y. She named school A as her first preference and school B as her third preference. School A offered a place for Y which Mrs X accepted.
11. Mrs X then applied for home to school transport assistance for Y. The Council refused her application as it considered school A was not the nearest available school with a place. It considered school B was the nearest available school. The Council also considered Mrs X did not qualify for transport assistance under the low-income criteria.
12. Mrs X requested an officer review of the Council’s decision to refuse her application. When making her request, Mrs X said she thought school A was her child’s nearest available school. This was based on information the Council had provided when she made applications for her other children some years earlier.
13. An officer reviewed Mrs X’s application but upheld the decision to refuse it as they considered Y was not attending the nearest available school. The Council’s letter notifying Mrs X of its decision said that school B was Y’s nearest available school.
14. Mrs X appealed against this decision to the appeal panel. The appeal panel considered Mrs X’s appeal but refused it. This is because the panel considered school A was not Y’s nearest available school. Mrs X has said panel members asked inappropriate questions about her work intentions during the hearing.
15. In response to my enquiries, the Council acknowledged that it had not assessed Mrs X’s application in accordance with its home to school transport policy. The Council said that most schools used a straight line measurement when determining which pupils lived closest to the school for admission purposes. But officers had overlooked the fact that school B used walking route distances. So, school A rather than school B was Y’s nearest available school. The Council should therefore have agreed transport assistance for Y.
16. The Council said it had contacted Mrs X to advise it will provide transport assistance for Y. It will also refund the costs she incurred in transporting Y since the beginning of the academic year. The Council offered a symbolic payment of £50 for the avoidable distress caused to Mrs X.
17. The Council has also provided evidence to show it has reminded officers of the need to diligently check the admissions information for schools when determining the nearest available school for transport purposes.

Appeal panel questioning

18. The Council has said the panel was required to take into account parental circumstances when considering the appeal. This was why the panel members asked Mrs X about her work intentions.

Analysis

19. The Council has acknowledged that it wrongly refused Mrs X’s application for assistance with school transport for Y. The Council will now provide transport assistance for Y and it will also refund the costs incurred by Mrs X in transporting Y to school. This is an appropriate and proportionate remedy as it puts Mrs X back in the position she would have been if the fault had not occurred.
20. The Council has offered a symbolic payment of £50 to Mrs X to acknowledge the distress caused to her. I welcome the Council’s offer but I consider an increased payment is proportionate to acknowledge the avoidable distress and inconvenience caused to Mrs X. As a consequence of the Council’s decision to refuse her application, Mrs X had to seek an officer review and attend an appeal panel. Mrs X was also concerned that Y may have to move schools as she could not afford the travel costs which caused distress to her. I therefore consider an increased symbolic payment of £150 is appropriate and proportionate to acknowledge the distress and inconvenience caused.
21. The Council has provided evidence to show it has reminded officers of the need to check the admission information for schools when deciding the nearest available school. I am satisfied this action addresses the fault, so it is not necessary to recommend further service improvements.
22. Mrs X considers the appeal panel’s questions about her work intentions were inappropriate and caused distress to her. The Council’s position is that the panel’s questions were appropriate as it needed to consider her circumstances. I cannot know the tone of the panel’s questioning to determine if it was inappropriate. But I consider, on balance, there is no evidence of fault by the panel. The Council’s home to school transport policy shows the panel should take account of the family circumstances when considering an appeal. So, I do not consider the panel was at fault for asking Mrs X about her work intentions.

Back to top

Agreed action

23. That the Council will:
1. Send a written apology to Mrs X for the distress and inconvenience caused by the Council wrongly refusing her application for home to school transport support. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
2. Make a symbolic payment of £150 to Mrs X to acknowledge the avoidable distress and inconvenience caused.
3. Provide transport assistance for Y.
4. Refund the costs incurred by Mrs X in transporting Y to school since the beginning of the academic year.
24. The Council should take the above action within one month of my final decision. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I have completed my investigation and I uphold Mrs X’s complaint.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman