Agenda item

To consider an appeal lodged in connection with the provision of assistance for home to school transport. (This item contains personal information regarding the appellant, which is exempt from publication by virtue of Paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972).

The Committee considered a request to review the decision of the Council to not provide assistance with home to school transport in respect of AJ.

Mrs Sharon Davies, Legal Advisor, was in attendance to advise the Committee on procedure and policy only and had taken no part in the original decision. Also in attendance was Mrs Sarah Chadwick, Clerk to the Committee.

The relevant Head of Service presented the case on behalf of the Council and advised the Committee of the reasons why the child had not been awarded home to school transport. It was explained that the distance from home to school was within the specified walking distance and members were reminded that the policy stated that family circumstances could not be taken into consideration when determining eligibility. In addition, following consideration of the EHCP submitted with the application, a SEND Officer had stated that the child did not require transport as their level of need was not considered to be exceptional.

The Head of Service outlined the unusual circumstances of AJ’s case in that although an application for transport had previously been declined, due to an administrative error transport had been provided for a fixed period to enable the family to put alternative arrangements in place to get the child to school until the appeal was heard. That arrangement was coming to an end and as the policy was now being fully and correctly applied AJ did not qualify for home to school transport going forwards in accordance with the policy.

Family members of AJ attended and presented the case on behalf of the appellant. AJ’s difficulties were outlined and family members questioned the assessment by the SEND officer as in their opinion the child’s needs were exceptional as they were unable to walk long distances. Family members’ medical and physical restrictions also meant they were unable to accompany them on the walk. The family considered public transport to be unsuitable and highlighted that AJ had felt comfortable with the structure and routine that the previously provided home to school transport had offered.

The Committee considered the evidence submitted by both parties and acknowledged the circumstances by which AJ had previously received transport. AJ’s needs and the family’s personal circumstances were noted however in its opinion there was a lack of medical evidence to support the family members’ inability to accompany AJ to school and the Committee therefore concluded that the application did not qualify as exceptional. It was satisfied that the decision not to provide assistance with home to school transport was reasonable and that the Council’s policies and procedures had been followed correctly.

Resolved

To uphold the decision not to provide home to school transport on the grounds that the decision was made in accordance with the Council’s Home to School Transport Policy and the Committee did not consider that there were sufficient special circumstances or considerations to override the policy.