Agenda item

Home to School Transport Appeals

Report of the Executive Director, People Services

Minutes:

6.1

Verbal Appeal – WW1

 

 

6.1.1

In attendance were the appellant and Hilary Hoult (People Services).

 

 

6.1.2

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked attendees to introduce themselves.  He then outlined the procedure which would be followed during the meeting.

 

 

6.1.3

The Executive Director, People Services, submitted a report and commented upon a case where the parent had appealed against the administrative decision made by the Executive Director with regard to the refusal to grant Special Educational Needs (SEN) home to school transport (Case No.WW1).

 

 

6.1.4

Hilary Hoult explained the SEN transport policy which stipulates that transport will not be provided where the applicant does not attend their nearest appropriate school. Ms. Hoult stated that the child lived 0.2 miles from the catchment school and 1.4 miles from the school he currently attends and that to provide transport would incur significant cost to the Authority.  She further stated that the child currently does not have an Education and Health Care Plan (EHCP) in place.

 

 

6.1.5

The appellant explained to the Committee the reasons for the request for the travel pass.

 

 

6.1.6

In response to questions from Members, the appellant stated that she was in the process of gathering as much evidence as possible for her child to be assessed for a EHCP to be put in place by September.  She stated that she had contacted two schools within her catchment area to identify the needs required for her child, one school was unable to meet his needs and she received no response to her request from the other one.  The appellant added that the school her child does attend gives full support and this was benefitting her child.  She further stated that she had made every effort to get her child to school on public transport, but this had worsened his condition.

 

 

6.1.7

At this stage in the proceedings, the appellant left the meeting to enable the Committee to consider the evidence.

 

 

6.1.8

RESOLVED: That the appeal be upheld on the grounds that there are exceptional medical and educational circumstances in the case (Case No. WW1).

 

 

6.2

Verbal Appeal – BRO1

 

 

6.2.1

In attendance were the appellant and Julie Pryor and Andy Tierney (Customer Services).

 

 

6.2.2

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked attendees to introduce themselves.  He then outlined the procedure which would be followed during the meeting.

 

 

6.2.3

The Executive Director, People Services, submitted a report and commented upon a case where the parent had appealed against the administrative decision made by the Executive Director with regard to the refusal to grant a home to school travel bus pass (Case No.BRO1).

 

 

6.2.4

Julie Pryor and Andy Tierney explained the Stage 1 review and Stage 2 appeals process regarding the City Council’s Home to School Transport Policy.  Ms. Pryor and Mr. Tierney informed the Committee of the reasons why the request for a home to school travel pass had been refused at Stage 1.

 

 

6.2.5

The appellant explained to the Committee the reasons for the request for a home to school travel pass for his child.

 

 

6.2.6

In response to questions from Members, the appellant stated that his child used to attend the catchment school but had undergone a managed move, arranged by the catchment school and the school he now attends, due to issues, which he outlined in detail, with various groups of pupils who had carried out constant and sustained campaigns of bullying and harassment.

 

 

6.2.7

At this stage in the proceedings, the appellant left the meeting to enable the Committee to consider the evidence.

 

 

6.2.8

RESOLVED: That the appeal be upheld on the grounds that there are exceptional educational and family circumstances in the case (Case No. BRO1).