Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide a chaperone for her child’s taxi journey to school. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our further involvement .

The complaint

1. Miss X said the Council failed to properly consider her case that her child needed a chaperone in taxi transport to school.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s responses to Miss X’s complaint, which she provided, show its panel properly considered the points she put forward. These were essentially that her child had a diagnosis of autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) and might have a meltdown in the vehicle, causing risk to themselves and other children. The panel took the view that the taxi driver and the school had reported no problems. It also found that the school’s suggestion that the child have an iPad to alleviate boredom during the journey had been successful. Where a panel has acted properly by considering the evidence before it and reaching a view, any investigation by us would be unlikely to lead to a finding of fault. That Miss X takes a different view does not amount to evidence of fault.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to warrant investigation by us.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman