Agenda item

Student Support Appeals

(Not for Publication – Exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972.  It is considered that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interests in disclosing the information).

 

Please note that due to the confidential nature of the information included in this report it will not be published on the website.

Minutes:

Note: Reason for exclusion – exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972. It was considered that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information).

 

In considering each appeal the Committee examined all of the information presented and also had regard to the relevant policies, including the Home to Mainstream School Transport Policy for 2018/19, and the Policy in relation to the transport of pupils with Special Educational Needs for 2013/14.

 

4552

 

It was reported that a request for transport assistance had initially been refused as the pupil would not be attending their nearest suitable school, which was 2.99 miles from the home address, and within the statutory walking distance of under 3 miles and instead would attend a school which was 5.25 miles away. The pupil was therefore not entitled to free transport in accordance with the Council's policy or the law.

 

The Committee noted the appellant explained that the school attended by the pupil was chosen on faith ground and a place was offered on this basis.  It was acknowledged that there were nearer schools to the family home, however, they were not of the faith school the appellant wanted for the pupil.  Also, the appellant added that failing to allow travel on the appropriate transport appeared to discriminate against this religious choice. 

 

It was noted by the Committee the appellant stated that they felt that the alternative were inappropriate and offered an example of the difficulties travelling to nonfaith school on a daily basis, adding that in distance, it was further than the school attended by the pupil.

 

The appellant stated, as noted by the Committee, there were difficulties travelling to the nearest suitable school, but in addition, there were Health and Safety issues to consider.  School bus travel to the school attended by the pupil provided a safe and convenient journey.

 

The Committee noted the Officer's comments which stated it is parental preference for schools and academies and the application of admission arrangements linked to these which informs and drives the subsequent application of the Local Authority's home to school transport policy.  The Council has no statutory duty to provide transport assistance in circumstances where pupils do not attend their nearest school or academy.

 

It was brought to the Committee's attention that eligibility to receive transport assistance is assessed by determining the distance between a child's home and the nearest school they could attend.  This measurement is taken from the nearest boundary entrance of the pupil's home to the nearest entrance to the school.  Admission information is available to all parents at the time of applying for school places.  A summary transport policy is made available to all, which parents and carers are advised to check carefully, if getting their child from home to school and back is a consideration.  Parents are directed to a full copy of the Home to School Transport Policy on the Lancashire County Council website and to seek advice from the area education office if they have any queries.  The County Council also has officers in attendance at most schools open evenings to give advice on transport eligibility and admission queries. 

 

 

The Committee also noted, as stated in the Officer's notes, had family been classed as in receipt of a low income, the pupil would have qualified for free home to school transport as the pupil had been admitted on faith grounds and the school is nearest of child's faith. In this instance, family were not in receipt of free school meals nor has evidence been provided of family been in receipt of the maximum amount of working tax credits.  In light of this, the family did not have a statutory eligibility to free home to school transport.

 

It was noted by the Committee, free transport on faith grounds could only be granted if a family was in receipt of low income, pupil was attending the nearest school of child's faith and provided the distance was between 2 and 15 miles.

 

The Committee noted the appellant stated in the appeal statement when describing the route to the nearest suitable school, that the "trunk road" up to the lane to the nearest suitable school had no footpath.  The Officer's notes stated that was not the case, knowing the local area and looking on google imaging there was a footpath up this trunk road that lead to lane to the nearest suitable school.

 

It was noted by the Committee, however, as the nearest suitable school was deemed as the closest school (as a place at the closest school at 2.75 miles would not have been offered even if appellant had stated as a preference), in light of the distance to get to the nearest suitable school being 15 yards short of the qualification for free transport of 3 miles, should pupil have attended the nearest suitable school, the Officers would have conducted a manual walk/measurement of the route to get to school.  Had this manual measurement exceeded the 3 mile mark, free transport would have been authorised to get to the nearest suitable school, which would take the pupil from home to school alleviating the appellants concern over the route to get to this school.  This option remains open should the appellant wish to switch to the nearest suitable school in the future.  Should this occur, a new transport assessment would be conducted based on school space availability at time of change.

 

The Committee noted the officers response relating to attendance at a school of faith and noted that transport assistance is available where a pupil is attending their nearest faith school where as a parental contribution is paid.  The committee were advised that where pupils attend their nearest faith school parents have been required to pay a contributory charge and that this charge can be paid monthly, the annual fee for 2018/19 is currently £615.00. 

 

In considering the appeal further the Committee considered the family's financial circumstances noted that they were not in a position to decide if the family were on a low income as defined in law. No evidence had been provided to suggest that the family were unable to fund the cost of transport to school. It was also noted that the family were not eligible for Free School Meals. 

 

The Committee also noted that the appellant had signed the application form, for the transport appeal and that this states that "I Declare that the information given in this application is correct and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, I have attached all relevant supplementary information I wish to make available to support my case."

Therefore, having considered all of the appellant's comments and the officer responses as set out in the Appeal Schedule, application form and supplementary evidence the Committee felt that the school the pupil would attend was a matter of parental preference and was not persuaded that there was sufficient reason to uphold the appeal.

 

Resolved: That, having considered all of the circumstances and the information as set out in the report presented, appeal 4552 be refused on the grounds that the reasons put forward in support of the appeal did not merit the Committee exercising its discretion to make an exception and award transport assistance that is not in accordance with the Home to Mainstream School Transport Policy for 2018/19.

 

 

Appeal 4647

It was reported that a request for transport assistance had initially been refused as the pupil would not be attending their nearest suitable school, which was 0.70 miles from the home address, and within the statutory walking distance of under 3 miles and instead would attend a school which was 10.72 miles away. The pupil was therefore not entitled to free transport in accordance with the Council's policy or the law.

 

The family were appealing to the Committee on the grounds that they had extenuating circumstances to warrant the Committee in exercising its discretion and award transport that was not in accordance with the Council's policy or the law.

 

In considering the appellant's appeal the committee noted that the appellant was appealing on medical grounds because the pupil suffered from a few health issues and the school the pupil attended had worked with the pupil since they left their previous school.  The pupil also attended hospitals for appointments. 

 

The Committee noted the appellant stated that if the pupil had to take 3 buses to the school attended, they would not be able to move when they arrived at school, as being in the same position caused them severe pain.  The appellant stated they didn't know which resources were available to assist the family with the pupil's medical condition.  The appellant stated they had also tried for 2 weeks to get help from extended family/friends/neighbours to support the pupil without success.  The appellant doesn't have access to transport.

 

It was also noted by the Committee, the appellant was also appealing on grounds of education continuity.  According to the statement by the appellant the Social Worker had stated that the pupil was not to change schools again as the pupil was behind in their education and the school attended had made adjustments to meet the pupil's needs.

 

The Committee noted the appellant had stated transport would be required to start as soon as possible. It was noted the appellant had moved into their new permanent address recently and was noted that the move was not voluntary.

 

It was noted by the Committee the family was receiving support from the school attended and professional teams dealing with children.

 

The Committee noted the Officer's comments which stated it is parental preference for schools and academies and the application of admission arrangements linked to these which informs and drives the subsequent application of the Local Authority's home to school to transport policy.  The Council has no statutory duty to provide transport assistance in circumstances where pupils do no attend their nearest school or academy.

 

The Committee were advised that there is additional assistance available to low income families but only if the parents are in receipt of one of the qualifying benefits for free school meals or are in receipt of the maximum working tax credits.  In order to qualify for help with travel costs, a pupil must be attending one of their nearest three schools between 2 and 6 miles.  In this instance the pupil was not attending one of the three closest schools to home and the distance to get to the school attended by the pupil exceeded 6 miles.  Although the family had an active claim for free school meals (through the government's transitional protection arrangements), free transport still couldn't be authorised.

 

It was brought to the Committee's attention that in light of the medical need of the pupil, the officers have confirmed with the special educational needs team that the child did not have a statement of special educational needs or Educational Healthcare Plan.  This has led the Officers to also look at the parts of the policy with referred to the medical need of the pupil.

 

The Officers have checked Appendix B of the transport policy which referred to long term medical needs but as the pupil was not attending the nearest school to home, this part of the policy was not applicable.

 

Policy 1.1 Long Term Cases

Where  pupils live within the statutory walking distance between home and their nearest suitable school and where it is apparent that a pupil is physically unable to walk to school, transport provision may be initially considered.  Substantial medical evidence will need to be provided.  Provision of transport will not usually be offered where a pupil does not attend their nearest school, unless the medical incapacity arises where the pupil is in Year 10 and Year 11 in secondary school or in Year 6 in primary school.  The County Council will however consider cases in other year groups where there has been a significant change in circumstances relating to a child's medical condition.

The Committee noted the pupil had an active claim for free school meals.

It was also brought to the Committee's notice that the medical report from the independent educational psychologist relating to the pupil was dated 2018.  The Committee have noted the supporting information sent in by Social Worker.

It was brought to the Committee's attention that further enquiries had been made to confirm whether the pupil was living with appellant or other members of the family and it was confirmed by the school the pupil attended that the pupil was living with the appellant but the pupil had not been attending school since 27th March 2019 as the appellant stated they could not afford the cost of travel to school and back and they were not getting any help from the other family members. The school the pupil was to attend has been checking on the pupil daily as they are not attending school presently.  It was also noted that the pupil would be able to attend a school closer to the home address as there was place available.

On checking the pupil's health, It was noted by the Committee, there was no plan in place for the pupil as they had no issues with mobility.  It was also brought to the attention of the Committee that the pupil had chosen to move to live with the appellant who lives further away from the school attended.  The pupil was previously living with the other parent and a family member who lived near to the school but due to disciplinary issues the pupil chose to move away.  The school the pupil is to attend mentioned that the pupil needs stability in their life.

In considering the family’s financial circumstances the Committee noted that the family are not on a low income as defined in law.  The appellant states that due to financial circumstances they cannot afford the cost of the travel for the pupil to attend school.  No evidence had been provided to suggest that the family were unable to fund the cost of transport to school. It was also noted that the family were not eligible for Free School Meals or in receipt of the Maximum amount of working tax credits. 

The Committee noted that it is the responsibility of the parent/carers to ensure that children arrive safe at school.  There is no dispensation for parents or carers who due to work commitments or other commitments i.e. taking other children to school who are unable to transport children to school.  The committee note that in these instances that parents/carers are expected to make suitable arrangements to ensure that pupils in their care arrive safe at school. 

 

The Committee also noted that the appellant had signed the application form for the transport appeal and that this states that "I Declare that the information given in this application is correct and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, I have attached all relevant supplementary information I wish to make available to support my case."

 

Resolved: That, having considered all of the circumstances and the information as set out in the report presented, appeal 4647 be refused on the grounds that the reasons put forward in support of the appeal did not merit the Committee exercising its discretion to make an exception and award transport assistance that is not in accordance with the Home to Mainstream School Transport Policy for 2018/19.

 

 

Appeal 4648

It was reported that a request for transport assistance had initially been refused as the pupil would be attending their nearest suitable school, which was 2.90 miles from the home address, and within the statutory walking distance of under 3 miles. The pupil was therefore not entitled to free transport in accordance with the Council's policy or the law.

 

The appellant stated, as noted by the Committee, they lived alone with the pupil and were retired and in receipt of state pension per month.  They were appealing on financial grounds and they couldn't afford the pupil's bus fares.

 

The Committee noted the appellant's application for a bus pass was denied because the pupil lived too close to school by 0.9 of a mile.  The appellant noted that all the children who lived in their area had to walk to the same bus stop and the majority of them had bus passes.  The appellant, therefore, couldn't understand why the pupil was being treated differently.  The appellant felt that a large part of the route was unsafe for pedestrians as it didn't have pavements.  The appellant stated transport would be required to start as soon as possible and end when the pupil finished school.

 

The Officer's comments stated, as noted by the Committee, that the pupil had been refused transport assistance as the distance between home and school was less than three miles.  The Department for Education statutory guidance on home to school travel requires assessments to be based on the distance between home and school with no consideration of how the journey to school might be undertaken.  It was accepted that there were some pupils who lived in the area who qualified for a travel pass as they lived over the statutory distance.

 

It was brought to the Committee's attention that the route between the pupil's home address and the school attended by them had been assessed and the whole route had a pavement and there were wide verges for stepping off.  As parents have a primary responsibility for ensuring their child's safe arrival at school, when assessing the suitability of a route the County Council assumes that the pupil is accompanied, where necessary, by a parent or other responsible person.

 

The Committee noted that it is the responsibility of the parent/carers to ensure that children arrive safe at school.  There is no dispensation for parents or carers who due to work commitments or other commitments i.e. taking other children to school are unable to transport children to and from school, the committee note that in these instances that parents/carers are expected to make suitable arrangements to ensure that pupils in their care arrive safely at school and at home at the end of the school day.

The Committee were advised that admissions information is available for all parents from the beginning of admission term and parents are advised to check the policy carefully if home to school transport is an important issue.  Parents are also able to seek advice from the area education offices and officers are also available in most schools during open evenings to offer advice on transport eligibility and admission enquiries.

It was noted by the Committee, that there is additional transport assistance available for low income families but the appellant was marginally above the income threshold and the pupil was not receiving free school meals.

 

Therefore, having considered all of the appellant's comments and the officer responses as set out in the Appeal Schedule, application form and supplementary evidence the Committee felt that the school the pupil would attend was a matter of parental preference and was not persuaded that there was sufficient reason to uphold the appeal

Resolved: That, having considered all of the circumstances and the information as set out in the report presented, appeal 4648 be refused on the grounds that the reasons put forward in support of the appeal did not merit the Committee exercising its discretion to make an exception and award transport assistance that is not in accordance with the Home to Mainstream School Transport Policy for 2018/19.

 

 

 

Appeal 4649

It was reported that a request for transport assistance had initially been refused as the pupils  would be attending their nearest suitable school, which was 1.86 miles from the home address, and within the statutory walking distance of under 3 miles. The pupil was therefore not entitled to free transport in accordance with the Council's policy or the law.

 

In considering the appeal further, the Committee noted the appellant was requesting transport assistance on financial grounds.  The appellant stated they worked part-time and were not entitled to any benefits.  Their partner did not work. The appellant stated that they and their partner didn't have a form of transport and couldn't afford to run one.  The family were struggling financially and the cost of travel was making it difficult for them to make ends meet.  The appellant's partner was taking both pupils to school on the bus. The appellant had provided proof of bus fares.

 

It was noted by the Committee the family were being supported by the Children and Family Wellbeing Service.

 

The Committee noted the family moved from another country to the area in 2018 and they tried to find a place in a school in the area for the pupils but they were all full.  The only school with availability was the school attended and the pupils were enrolled there.  The pupils have settled well into the school and the family did not wish to disrupt their education or cause them any upset by moving them.

 

The appellant had stated, as noted by the Committee, that transport would be required as soon as possible until the pupils left school.

 

The Officer's comments stated, as noted by the Committee, that the County Council's records confirmed that the school attended by the pupils was the nearest school with places available when the family moved in to the area.  It was acknowledged that there was currently a shortage of school places in the area and families who are new to the area struggled to secure places in the closest schools to home.

 

The Committee noted that transport assistance had been refused as the pupils lived under two miles from the school they are attending.  For children aged 8 and under there is entitlement if the pupils lived over two miles from their nearest qualifying school.  For the pupil in year 3 the qualifying distance is three miles and over.

 

It was noted by the Committee the pupils were not in receipt of free school meals.

 

In considering the family’s financial circumstances the Committee noted that the family are not on a low income as defined in law.  The appellant states that due to financial circumstances they cannot afford the cost of the travel for the pupils  to attend school.  No evidence had been provided to suggest that the family were unable to fund the cost of transport to school. It was also noted that the family were not eligible for Free School Meals or in receipt of the Maximum amount of working tax credits. 

The Committee also noted that the appellant had signed the application form for the transport appeal and that this states that "I Declare that the information given in this application is correct and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Therefore, having considered all of the appellant's comments and the officer responses as set out in the Appeal Schedule, application form and supplementary evidence the Committee felt that the school the pupil would attend was a matter of parental preference and was not persuaded that there was sufficient reason to uphold the appeal

Resolved: That, having considered all of the circumstances and the information as set out in the report presented, appeal 4649 be refused on the grounds that the reasons put forward in support of the appeal did not merit the Committee exercising its discretion to make an exception and award transport assistance that is not in accordance with the Home to Mainstream School Transport Policy for 2018/19.

 

 

Appeal 4650

It was reported that a request for transport assistance had initially been refused as the pupil would not be attending their nearest suitable school, which was 2.57 miles from their home address, and instead would attend their 5th nearest school which was 5.77 miles. The pupil was therefore not entitled to free transport in accordance with the Council's policy or the law. The Appellant was appealing to the Committee on the grounds that they had extenuating circumstances to warrant the Committee in exercising its discretion and award transport that was not in accordance with the Council's policy or the law.

 

The appellant, as noted by the Committee, was appealing on financial grounds.  They had advised that they were self-employed and lived with their disabled partner who didn't work.  Their total monthly income was stated on the form.  The appellant also stated that a copy of their latest tax credit award notice was provided with their last application, but they didn't state what that application was for and it had not been received by the Children's Transport Team.

 

It was also noted by the Committee, that the appellant was also appealing on medical grounds because their partner suffered from a health condition. The appellant's partner was not able to walk unaided, was no longer able to drive their mobility car and was in constant pain.  There was no help from extended family, friends or neighbours to support the pupil in getting to school.  The appellant drove the pupil to school or they caught the bus costing them £4 per day.

 

The Committee noted, the appellant drew attention to the fact that their partner's condition was worsening making the school run difficult, as there were times when the appellant couldn't leave the partner alone or had to attend a medical appointment. The appellant stated if they became ill, there would be no one to drive the pupil to school and their funds were limited for bus fares.  The pupil couldn't walk to school as approximately 2 miles of the rote doesn't have a footpath.  The appellant stated they had other children which they had to take to and from school.

 

The appellant stated, as noted by the Committee, the pupil had medical problem which mad the school important for them to attend.  They are also under observation at a medical centre for possible other health issue.  The school have addressed the pupil's condition by splitting the school day in the best way for them to manage (unlike other schools in the area).  The appellant stated the school attended by the pupil was also a smaller school and they found it less intimidating and easier to settle in.  It had the best support unit so if the pupil was struggling, they could have time and space to manage.  The pupil presently didn't have an EHCP but the appellant stated they were working on it.

 

The Committee noted the appellant stated they required transport as soon as possible until the pupil left school.

 

The Officer's comments stated as noted by the Committee, transport assistance had been refused as the pupil was not attending their nearest qualifying school.  It was accepted that the school the pupil attended was the appellant's preferred school at the time the pupil transferred to school but there were a number of nearer schools that they could have attended.  The school website for the school attended by the pupil suggested there were approximately 800 pupils on roll. There were less than 300 pupils on roll at the nearest suitable school.

 

The County Council's Home to School Transport Policy, as noted by the Committee, stated it did allow for the provision of discretionary transport assistance for children whose parents due to their medical condition were unable to accompany their child to school but transport assistance was only awarded if the family met the low income criteria.

 

The Committee noted the pupil was able to use the bus to travel with their friends to school.  There was a public bus available that picked in the area that dropped off at the school attended by the pupil.

 

The Officer's comments stated, as noted by the Committee that if the pupil was assessed and support was provided through Education, Health and Care Plan then the provision of transport would be considered as part of the assessment.

 

It was noted by the Committee the pupil were not in receipt of free school meals.

 

In considering the family’s financial circumstances the Committee noted that the family are not on a low income as defined in law.  The appellant states that due to financial circumstances they cannot afford the cost of the travel for the pupil to attend school.  No evidence had been provided to suggest that the family were unable to fund the cost of transport to school. It was also noted that the family were not eligible for Free School Meals or in receipt of the Maximum amount of working tax credits. 

The Committee also noted that the appellant had signed the application form for the transport appeal and that this states that "I Declare that the information given in this application is correct and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Therefore, having considered all of the appellant's comments and the officer responses as set out in the Appeal Schedule, application form and supplementary evidence the Committee felt that the school the pupil would attend was a matter of parental preference and was not persuaded that there was sufficient reason to uphold the appeal

Resolved: That, having considered all of the circumstances and the information as set out in the report presented, appeal 4650 be refused on the grounds that the reasons put forward in support of the appeal did not merit the Committee exercising its discretion to make an exception and award transport assistance that is not in accordance with the Home to Mainstream School Transport Policy for 2018/19.

 

Appeal 4651

It was reported that a request for transport assistance had initially been refused as the pupil would not be attending their nearest suitable school, which was 0.68 miles from their home address, and instead would attend school which was 6.38 miles. The pupil was therefore not entitled to free transport in accordance with the Council's policy or the law. The Appellant was appealing to the Committee on the grounds that they had extenuating circumstances to warrant the Committee in exercising its discretion and award transport that was not in accordance with the Council's policy or the law.

 

It was noted by the Committee the appellant stated the family moved to the present home area in 2018 as they needed a larger house for their family.  The family were appealing on medical grounds, as the people suffered from health issues.  The pupil couldn't handle change and therefore couldn't change schools.  The pupil was now settled after 3 years at this school.

The Committee noted the family had stated they were in receipt of benefits. The appellant and their partner presently drove the pupil to and from school and mentioned that the pupil used to get a tax 2 year ago to their previous school.  The appellant was requesting transport from April 2019 until the pupil left school at the end of Year 11.

The Officer's comments stated, as noted by Committee, transport had been refused because the pupil was not attending their nearest suitable school. 

It was brought to the Committee's attention there is an additional entitlement to transport assistance for low income families which are those parents in receipt of the qualifying benefits for free school meals or the maximum amount of Working Tax Credit.  Free travel is provided if a pupil is attending one of their three nearest schools and the school is situated between 2 and 6 miles from home.  The pupil was in receipt of Free School Meals however the school attended by the pupil was not one of their three nearest schools with a place available and was more than 6 miles away from the home address.

The Committee noted the pupil started Year 7 in September 2016 and attended a different school to which they were entitled to transport assistance on low income grounds from the previous home address and a bus pass was provided.  A transport appeal was submitted requesting taxi transport, rather than a bus pass.  This was approved by the Student Support Appeals Committee in March 2017 until the end of Year 8 (July 2018).  However the Officer's records indicated that the pupil changed schools in September 2017 to attend the present school so transport was no longer required.

It was brought to the Committee's attention that the pupil did not have an Education, Health and Care Plan.  The statutory guidance from the Department for Education states that sch9ols can be considered when undertaking assessments to receive transport assistance if they have placed available and "provide education appropriate to the age, ability and aptitude of the child, and any SEN that child may have".

It was recognised by the Committee that the County Council delegated a significant amount of funding to all mainstream high schools to provide the learning support for pupils with additional needs.  All schools are expected to provide the necessary support to enable a pupil to fully access the curriculum.

It was noted by the Committee that transport appeals were evidence based.  No documentation had been provided to indicate that the school attended by the pupil was the only school that could meet the pupil's needs.

The Committee were informed that there was a public bus service from the home area to the school attended by the pupil with the stop from home a few minutes' walk away.  The appellant would be able to contact the relevant operator to enquire about purchasing a ticket.  Details of monthly amounts can be found by visiting website https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/children-education-families/schools/school-transport/school-bus-season-tickets/?page=4

The Committee noted the pupil was in receipt of Free School Meals. 

In considering the family’s financial circumstances the Committee noted that the family was not on a low income as defined in law. No financial evidence had been supplied to suggest that the family would be unable to fund the cost of transport to get the pupil to school and back.

The Committee also noted that the appellant had signed the application form for the transport appeal and that this states that "I Declare that the information given in this application is correct and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, I have attached all relevant supplementary information I wish to make available to support my case."

Therefore, having considered all of the appellant's comments and the officer responses as set out in the Appeal Schedule, application form and supplementary evidence the Committee felt that the school the pupil would attend was a matter of parental preference and was not persuaded that there was sufficient reason to uphold the appeal

Resolved: That, having considered all of the circumstances and the information as set out in the report presented, appeal 4651 be refused on the grounds that the reasons put forward in support of the appeal did not merit the Committee exercising its discretion to make an exception and award transport assistance that is not in accordance with the Home to Mainstream School Transport Policy for 2018/19.