SPECIAL educational needs students in Bracknell could be missing out on home-to-school transport paid for by the council after it emerged the authority had incorrectly refused to pay for an autistic boy’s transport.

Bracknell Forest Council (BFC) has been forced to apologise to the family of an autistic boy after it wrongly rejected his mother’s appeal for council-paid transport to his school due to a “breach of policy”.

This comes after the eleven-year-old’s mother complained to a local government watchdog suggesting BFC tests were “incorrect” and “discriminatory”.

And according to the watchdog, the council “did not properly consider this matter in accordance with the law for a number of reasons.”

This decision means other pupils “may have been similarly affected” to how the boy was, as the council has since identified a “number of other students” who could be eligible for this provision.

The council’s policy was “fundamental to the poor decision making in this case” and has been asked to review its guidelines by the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO).

As a result of the watchdog’s investigation, the council agreed to apologise to the boy’s mother, as well as pay her £500.

It is also set to reconsider the case for assessing the boy’s transport needs using the correct criteria and should it be agreed he is eligible for the provision, the council will reimburse the mother for any transport costs incurred from September 2018.

The conflict between the mother and the authority began in March 2018, when BFC told the mother it would not pay for her son’s home-to-school transport.

This was because the distance from the family’s home to his school was 1.4 miles and classed as a safe walking distance.

But the mother appealed this decision and a council appeal committee was set up to hear the views of both the family and BFC.

Recordings from the meeting showed the committee was “verbally directed” towards the potential cost of providing the transport for the boy, which could cost the council more than £53,000 every year until he was 18.

After hearing evidence, the appeal was rejected by the committee after it suggested the boy could be accompanied by a parent on the walk to his school, which the panel noted was a special school rather than a mainstream establishment.

The Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) then stepped in to investigate the council’s practices after the mother claimed the council applied the wrong test, its policy was “incorrect” and “discriminatory”, and BFC did not take the stress of the journey for the boy into account.

However, the council hit back claiming the decision of its committee was correct, lawful, and non-discriminatory.

But the LGO found the council “did not properly consider this matter in accordance with the law for a number of reasons.”

The watchdog decided the council did, in fact, use the wrong test to assess the eleven-year-old boy on three occasions, and it was also discovered the council’s policy had “fault” which made it more difficult for disabled children to be considered for home-to-school transport.

Added in the LGO’s analysis was its concerns over the other potential applicants which may have been missing out due to the council’s current policy.

The News contacted the BFC for comment and in response, the council said it “accepted there was a breach of policy, amended the policy and the LGO is now satisfied.”