Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s refusal to issue a blue parking badge to him. He said that, as a result, it is more difficult for him to access the community and he undertakes fewer journeys. We found there was no fault with regards to the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s refusal to issue a blue parking badge to him. He said that, as a result, it is more difficult for him to access the community and he undertakes fewer journeys.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information I received from Mr X and the Council and interviewed the Occupational Therapist (OT) who carried out the most recent assessment of Mr X.
5. I shared a copy of my draft decision statement with Mr X and the Council and considered any comments I received, before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation and background

6. The Department for Transport (DfT) has issued guidance to councils for providing Blue Badges. The Blue Badge scheme entitles drivers or passengers with mobility problems to park nearer to their destination.
7. In 2019, the DfT issued new guidance for councils. The main change from previous guidance was the introduction of assessment criteria to help people with severe mobility problems caused by non-visible (‘hidden’) disabilities.
8. To qualify for a Blue Badge, an applicant must be assessed by their council as either ‘eligible without further assessment’ or ‘eligible subject to further assessment’.
9. To be eligible for a badge, those people who are eligible subject to further assessment must fall within one or more of the following descriptions:
• drives a vehicle regularly, has a severe disability in both arms and is unable to operate, or has considerable difficulty in operating, all or some types of parking meter; or
• has been certified by an expert assessor as having an enduring and substantial disability which causes them, during the course of a journey, to:
1. be unable to walk;
2. experience very considerable difficulty whilst walking, which may include a very considerable psychological distress; or be at risk of serious harm when walking; or pose, when walking, a risk of serious harm to any other person. (The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) Regulations, 4(2)(f))
10. The disability experienced by the applicant must be endured, or be expected to endure, for at least three years.
11. The words ‘very considerable difficulty’ may be understood as suggesting that the purpose of issuing a Badge should be to enable the applicant to undertake journeys that would not otherwise be possible, or which are only possible with very considerable difficulty.
12. The final decision rests with the council to decide if an applicant meets the eligibility criteria for a Blue Badge. Councils must consider each application solely on its merits and on application of the scheme’s eligibility criteria.

What happened

13. Mr X submitted an application for a blue badge in June 2021. In the application, he said that he needed a blue badge, because:
• Since he contracted Covid-19, which resulted in an admission to hospital, he had become very anxious of being amongst crowds in public spaces. A blue badge would therefore limit the contact he would have when walking between his car and shops.
• He has a condition in the top of his left leg, which causes him pain when walking. He also had shortness of breath (asthma) that makes walking difficult.
14. In terms of coping strategies, Mr X said he was using friends to take him and drop him off close to his destination. He said he was using pain relief medication and inhalers for his shortness of breath. Mr X was either undergoing or awaiting treatment for his conditions.
15. The record of Mr X’s assessment in August 2021 states he is able to walk from home to the local shop, a distance of 350 meters.
16. The Council told Mr X the outcome of his first assessment by email mid-August 2021. The email explained the eligibility criteria for a blue badge, and said that the risks outlined within the application, and the supporting evidence, did not show that he was unable to access the community. It said:
• The information showed he was currently accessing the community and achieving activities of daily living.
• He was able to successfully manage the issues he presented by applying effective coping strategies.
• Evidence provided showed Mr X could walk further than the distance recommended eligible by the Department for Transport Guidelines.
• As such, his condition(s) did not impact his mobility to a substantial level to make him eligible under the subject to further assessment criteria, and so it was unable to award a badge at this time.
• Mr X was currently receiving treatment that meant it was not possible to conclude his condition(s) would impact him to a substantial level for the life of the badge (the next 3 Years).
• Should his condition(s) or diagnosis change, he could apply again after 6 months.
17. Mr X was unhappy about the decision and made an appeal. He said that:
• He has PTSD due to his Covid-19 Hospital experience. He said that, as a result, he has anxiety and can break down or go into a fit of anger at the slightest situation. He said he does not go out because, if this happens, he will not be able to get to his car quickly if it is parked too far away.
• He has breathing issues and shortness of breath that affect his walking.
• As such, he does not go anywhere unless he has company with him or can park right outside.
18. The outcome of the appeal was that:
• Although Mr X has difficulties, they do not cause him considerable distress.
• He applies appropriate coping strategies and therapies such as: medication, face to face talking therapies from the Mental Health Team and support from friends.
• Physiotherapy may offer improved exercise tolerance, endurance, strength, and stability.
19. Following contact from the Ombudsman, the Council (an OT) contacted Mr X to carry out a telephone assessment. The record from this assessment states that:
• His leg-condition results in cramps and impacts his walking and standing. He was awaiting a review at the clinic; currently managed with medication
• Mr X was open to the respiratory team for his shortness of breath (SOB) symptoms. He had a longstanding diagnosis of asthma for which he was having regular medication. Mr X was awaiting a CT scan.
• Mr X was open to mental health services for PTSD following COVID-19. He was taking regular medication and was having a monthly follow up call from the team. He has been waiting for counselling since May 2021.
• Mr X said he walks 80 meters with difficulty.
• Mr X was anxious getting COVID-19 again. He said he would leave the venue if he felt anxious. Mr X was double vaccinated. He was awaiting counselling to learn alternative coping strategies and manage his feelings of anxiety. The OT said Mr X may also benefit from graded exposure, anxiety management techniques, mindfulness, relaxation and breathing exercises, when accessing the community. He has contact numbers for the crisis team if required.
• The OT concluded that:
1. Mr X’s independence would not be affected without badge.
2. Mr X did not evidence any considerable difficulty walking.
3. “Long Covid” could at this point not be described as substantial and enduring (3 years). He was receiving ongoing input, investigation and intervention.
4. The pain when walking may improve with physiotherapy.
5. Awaiting counselling which may provide additional strategies to manage symptoms
6. ASD/ADHD currently undiagnosed
7. Mr X shops online when possible and locally for 'bread and milk'
8. He is usually taken and dropped off for medical appointments
20. The Council said the assessment by an Occupational Therapist confirmed that Mr X was receiving ongoing support and treatment, including physiotherapy which was hoped to improve his mobility, strength and endurance, and considerable long term difficulty walking was not evidenced. Where needed, he was also using effective coping strategies to manage his anxiety, pain and SOB.
21. I undertook an interview with the OT who had carried out the most recent assessment of Mr X. The OT told me that:
• PTSD / Anxiety
1. At the time of the assessment, Mr X had monthly contact with the Mental Health Team and was awaiting counselling. It was hoped that this would improve his anxiety and give him some strategies to use. The Mental Health Team works with clients to try and reduce their anxiety and increase their independence. There was therefore an expectation this would improve and would not be enduring.
2. A Blue Badge could negatively impact Mr X’s recovery It would be better to address and support his longer-term recovery in more positive ways.
3. At the assessment, she discussed with Mr X what he was doing during various journeys and how he was coping. He also mentioned he had returned to work.
4. I explained to the OT that Mr X told me that, since the assessment, he had completed the counselling and it had not been useful for him. In response, the OT said that Mr X can always reapply within six months (April 2022) and point out this change in his circumstances.
• Mr X’s leg condition
1. This affected Mr X in terms of experiencing pain, not in a functional manner.
2. She looked at Mr X’s experiences and considered if it was impacting his ability to access facilities in the community, such as shops
3. She considers NICE guidelines of treatment to see what treatment a person is receiving, where they are on the treatment journey, what chances of improvement there are etc. Mr X was at the early stage of treatment. He was getting the right treatment, which should improve his experience. There was also an option to increase his pain relief medication if needed.
• Asthma:
1. This was self-managed with inhalers
2. The medical evidence recorded that Mr X did not have any acute exacerbations in the last year (ie needing additional medication or hospital intervention).
22. We also briefly discussed the option of coming in for an actual face-to-face mobility assessment. The OT explained that DfT guidelines say that people who have mental health issues may not find it helpful to come for an actual face to face mobility assessment as it may increase their anxiety / distress. She did not believe that, on this occasion, it was needed to have such an assessment to make the decision. The OT said that if Mr X wants such an assessment, he can request one next time and the Team Leader will consider this.
23. In response to my draft decision, Mr X said that he has been formally diagnosed with ADHD in mid-December 2021, and he was awaiting his autism assessment.

Analysis

24. It is not for me to say whether the Council should have awarded Mr X a Blue Badge. My role is to decide whether the Council followed the guidance and considered relevant information in how it reached its decision.
25. In this case, the evidence shows the Council followed the correct procedure in assessing Mr X’s application as set out in the guidance. The Council requested and considered the information he provided and concluded he was not eligible. The Council concluded that, at the time of the assessment, Mr X was still undergoing treatment, which meant it could not be concluded that some of his conditions would last (beyond) three years. Mr X was applying successful coping strategies and, although Mr X was experiencing difficulties, these were not stopping him from being able to access facilities in the community, to the extent that a Blue Badge was required.
26. This was a decision the Council was entitled to make, and the Ombudsman cannot question the merits of a decision which has been properly reached (see paragraph 3).
27. I do not therefore find fault by the Council in the way it considered and reached its decision that Mr X was not eligible for a Blue Badge.

Back to top

Final decision

28. For reasons explained above, I did not uphold Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman