Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Blue Badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. In addition, the Council provided a satisfactory response regarding a complaint about an offensive comment.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council has not properly assessed his Blue Bage application under the hidden disability rules. He wants the decision overturned.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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, or
• we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6) & 24A(7), as amended, section 34(B))

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes Mr X’s previous complaint to us, his medical evidence and the correspondence about the current and previous applications. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X applied for a Blue Badge which the Council refused. We asked the Council to reassess the application because we decided it had not properly considered Mr X’s hidden disability and how it might affect his ability to walk and access goods and services.
6. The Council asked Mr X to provide more information about his hidden disability and how it affects his mobility. Mr X responded and provided information about how he is affected. The Council also had access to a medical report about his hidden disability.
7. The Council re-considered Mr X’s original application, his medical report and the information Mr X provided about the impact of his hidden disability on his mobility. The Council decided Mr X does not qualify for a badge. Mr X asked for a review. The review was completed by a different officer who reached the same decision.
8. While the Council was handling Mr X’s case an officer made an offensive comment. The Council upheld Mr X’s complaint about this, said the officer’s comments were inappropriate, and offered sincere apiologies. The Council explained the officer was not involved in the appeal.
9. I will not investigate because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. We do not act as an appeal body and we cannot award a badge or over-turn the Council’s decision. It is not my role to decide if Mr X is eligible for a badge.
10. People with a hidden disability might qualify for a badge if they experience very considerable psychological distress while walking. Not everyone with a hidden disability will qualify for a badge. Mr X has explained, in detail, the problems he has in various situations. Some of these difficulties include walking and he has explained why having easy access to a car would be helpful. The Council considered his evidence about his hidden disability and the medical report but decided that Mr X has not demonstrated that, more or often than not, he experiences considerable difficulty when walking. The Council noted that some of the difficulties Mr X described do not relate to walking or would not be helped by a badge. The Council also noted Mr X has strategies in place to help him cope.
11. Mr X disagrees with the decision and does not think the Council has understood his condition. He also says the Council should have appointed an expert assessor. I can only consider if there was fault in the way the Council reached its decision and I have not seen any suggestion of fault. The Council explained, in detail, why it does not think Mr X qualifies for a badge and, in so doing, it referred to Mr X’s evidence, the report, and the guidance. The guidance does not require a council to use an expert assessor in every case but encourages councils to seek specific information from the applicant which the Council did. It is for the Council to decide whether it needs to use an expert assessor; the Council decided the combination of the medical report and Mr X’s evidence was sufficient for it to reach a decision. This was a decision it was entitled to make.
12. Mr X has referred to an offensive comment made by an officer. I acknowledge this may have caused some distress to Mr X but I will not investigate this part of the complaint because the Council provided a satisfactory response. It apologised and gave an assurance that the officer had no further involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in relation to the badge and because the Council has provided a satisfactory response regarding the comment.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman