Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to change the school transport pick-up point for the complainant’s children or the collection time. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the matter to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the school transport collection point the Council has set for her children is unsafe. She also says the collection time does not leave enough time to deal with unplanned delays which means there is an increased risk of her children being late for school.
2. Mrs X wants the Council to move the collection point to a location which she considers safer and move the collection time forward.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X’s children receive free school transport. Mrs X is not happy with the collection saying it is not safe. She also says the timings are wrong.
7. The Council confirms it has reviewed the collection point and is satisfied it is the safest waiting area. It also confirmed parents are responsible for ensuring their children are taken to the collection point in time and are looked after until the transport arrives. The Council is not responsible for the children until they board the transport in the mornings or after they alight from the transport in the afternoons. The Council also offered Mrs X a mileage allowance as an alternative to it providing transport.
8. In response to Mrs X’s enquires the Council confirmed it considered:
• the 20 miles per hour speed limit
• the safe refuge is on a driveway serving eight homes
• there is clear visibility in both directions
• there is no bus shelter
• the road is rural
• six children use the collection point; and
• there are no roads which are considered dangerous on the walking route to the collection point.
9. The Council considered Mrs X’s complaint according to its procedures. It considered video evidence provided by Ms X in support of her concerns. It decided not to change the collection point location or the pick-up times.
10. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether you disagree with the decision the organisation made.
11. The evidence shows the Council has considered Mrs X’s evidence in line with its policy and decided it will not change the travel arrangements for her children. The Council has taken Mrs X through its appeals process and maintained its decision. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision. An investigation into this matter would therefore be unlikely to result in finding fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council decided not to change the location of the collection point for her children’s school transport or the collection times.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman