Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an application for a Blue Badge because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to renew her Blue Badge.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
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 information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes Ms X’s application, medical reports and evidence the Council obtained from her nurse. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

5. People qualify for a badge if they are unable to walk, experience considerable difficulty when walking or are at serious risk of harm when walking. Some people with a hidden disability may qualify for a badge if they meet the Blue Badge rules; not everyone with a hidden disability will qualify.
6. The guidance says that people who can walk 80 metres and do not demonstrate very considerable difficulty in walking are not eligible for a badge. The guidance also says that, to award a badge, councils must be satisfied that the problems cannot be managed through coping strategies such as being accompanied by another person.
7. Ms X applied to renew her Blue Badge under the hidden disability rules. She explained she has a medical condition which causes her body to overheat. This can cause collapses, dizziness, confusion, anxiety and other problems. Ms X explained she manages this by never going out alone unless it is cold. Ms X also explained that when she gets hot she needs to return to the air conditioning in her car. Ms X reported she once collapsed in the road but was saved from injury by a friend.
8. The Council assessed her application and asked Ms X’s nurse for information. The nurse confirmed that Ms X had reported fainting from overheating and she may be at risk when she faints. The nurse said the sweats can be debilitating and Ms X has no mobility problems. The Council noted Ms X receives PIP but not at the rate which would passport her to a badge and that she received no PIP points for moving around. The Council decided not to award a badge because there is no evidence Ms X is virtually unable to walk and because she has strategies in place to keep her safe when walking.
9. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. We are not an appeal body and cannot decide whether someone is eligible for a badge. We have no power to award a badge.
10. I can only consider if the Council followed the correct process in assessing the application. The Council followed the correct process by considering information from Ms X and her nurse and by relating that evidence to the Blue Badge guidance and rules.
11. Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision and finds the loss of the badge to be detrimental but that does not mean there was fault in the way the Council reached its decision. And, as I have said, it is not my role to say whether the Council’s decision was right or wrong. The decision flows from the evidence and the guidance so there is no reason to start an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman