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

The complaint

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

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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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 read the complaint and information provided by the Council. This includes Mr X’s Blue Badge application and the mobility assessment reports (from 2016 and 2019). I invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. 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. Councils should take into account factors such as pain, speed, balance, gait and shortness of breath when assessing if someone can walk 80 metres. The guidance says that people who walk slowly will not be eligible if that is the only qualifying factor.

What happened

6. Many years ago Mr X had an accident which damaged his back. This caused nerve damage, walking problems and problems with his bladder and bowels. The Council did a mobility assessment in 2016 and decided Mr X was eligible for a Blue Badge.
7. Mr X applied to renew his badge. He explained that walking is painful and that he has asthma. The Council did a mobility assessment. The assessor noted Mr X’s medical problems, drugs, and that he uses a stick. Mr X reported that he walks to the shops which are 1200 metres from home. The assessor observed Mr X walking 88 metres at a slow pace, taking short steps and making light use of his stick. Mr X did not stop during the walk and was able to turn and manage a slight incline with no change in pace or gait. Mr X did not report pain or breathlessness and the assessor did not observe pain or breathlessness. The assessor noted that Mr X had had two falls. Mr X reported that his drugs manage his pain well. The assessor found that Mr X has some difficulty with walking but had not shown that he has very considerable difficulty. The Council decided Mr X does not qualify for a badge.
8. Mr X appealed and referred to the assessment in 2016 which found he was eligible for a badge. The Council reviewed the applications from 2016 and 2019 and found that both were correct. The Council confirmed its decision not to renew his badge.
9. Mr X says his walking can vary from day to day. He says his walking and asthma have got worse. He says the assessment was “out of the norm” for his general condition.

Assessment

10. I will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely I would find fault. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body and can only consider if there is fault in the way the Council has made a decision.
11. The Council considered the information Mr X provided on his application form and the findings of the mobility assessor. The assessment notes show the assessor considered pain, distance, balance, breathlessness and walking aids. The notes show there was a proper consideration of each point. In addition, the decision to refuse a badge is consistent with the guidance because Mr X walked more than 80 metres and speed is not a qualifying factor when considered in isolation.
12. Mr X is correct to say the 2016 assessment resulted in the Council awarding a badge but, it was subject to renewal, and a successful application is not a guarantee of future awards. In addition, while Mr X suggests he was having a good day, I can only consider if there was fault in the way the Council assessed his application and there is no suggestion of fault.

Back to top

Final decision

13. 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