Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has decided not to renew her son’s (Mr Y’s) blue badge. There is no fault in how the Council reached its decision.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains on behalf of her son, Mr Y. Mrs X says the Council refused Mr Y’s application for a disabled parking badge because he does not have considerable difficulty walking.
2. However, Mrs X says Mr Y is autistic and has severe learning difficulties and needs the badge. This is because his carers need to access a vehicle quickly due to his challenging behaviour.
3. Mrs X says Mr Y would automatically qualify for a badge under the emerging new blue badge legislation. She says the Council has ignored this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. 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)
6. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have considered Mrs X’s complaint and the information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
8. I have written to Mrs X and the Council with my draft decision and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

The Law

Current Guidance

9. The Government issued guidance (2014) to councils for providing Blue Badges to disabled people with severe mobility problems. The guidance includes a mobility assessment which most councils use to assess applicants.
10. The guidance sets out two types of eligibility criteria for issuing Blue Badges:

Eligible without further assessment

11. This means some people who fit into certain categories are automatically entitled to a blue badge. This includes people who receive:
• the Higher Rate of the Mobility Component of the Disability Living Allowance (HRMCDLA); or
• eight points or more under the “moving around” activity of the mobility component of Personal Independence Payment (PIP).

Eligible subject to further assessment

12. To qualify under this criterion, the applicant must have a permanent and substantial disability that causes inability to walk or very considerable difficulty in walking.
13. The guidance says that an independent mobility assessor should undertake a face-to-face assessment of the applicant’s mobility.

Emerging Guidance

14. There has been widespread criticism of the current guidance as a strict interpretation can lead to applications by people with “hidden disabilities” such as autism being refused by councils.
15. The Government published a consultation document which discussed the key issues involved when assessing an individual’s eligibility for a blue badge. This took place between January and March 2018.
16. In July 2018, the Government published its response to the consultation. This set out the next steps which includes the introduction of new eligibility criteria. These criteria will effectively extend the blue badge scheme to people with ‘hidden disabilities.
17. The new government guidance was issued in June 2019. It says an applicant will automatically qualify for a blue badge if he/she receives the mobility component of PIP and has obtained 10 points specifically for Descriptor E under the “planning and following journeys” activity, on the grounds that they are unable to undertake any journey because it would cause them overwhelming psychological distress.
18. The Government has confirmed the guidance will come into force on 30 August 2019.

What happened

19. Mr Y’s blue badge expired in December 2017. In April 2018, Mrs X applied on behalf of Mr Y to the Council to renew his blue badge. She explained it had expired due to an oversight by Mr Y’s carers.
20. In May 2018, the Council wrote to Mr Y with its decision on his blue badge renewal application. The letter explained in July 2013 Government guidance had changed. The guidance recommends that badges should only be issued to people who have a permanent and substantial disability who either cannot walk or are able to walk only at an extremely slow pace or with excessive pain. The Council said Mr Y’s application was denied. It explained that Mr Y did not meet the required level of criteria to issue a badge as his walking was not affected by his disability.
21. In June 2018, Mrs X wrote a letter of appeal against the decision to the Council. She explained how important the badge was to Mr Y and that it enabled him to access the community safely.
22. In July, the Council wrote to Mrs X. It said an appeal panel had reviewed Mr Y’s application. It concluded that Mr Y did not meet the required level of criteria to be issued with a blue badge.
23. Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision in August 2018, November 2018 and February 2019. The Council responded at each stage.
24. In its final response in February 2019, it explained that the government guidance on blue badge eligibility was clear in terms of the applicant’s mobility. It confirmed that Mr Y had achieved zero for the ‘moving around’ element of the mobility component of PIP. It confirmed he needed 8 points to automatically qualify.
25. The Council accepted that Mr Y would benefit from having a blue badge due to the nature of his problems. However, it explained that the current guidance is clear that badges should only be issued to people with mobility problems, following set criteria.
26. The Council acknowledged the Government has announced its intention to extend the blue badge scheme to people with ‘hidden disabilities’ such as autism. However, it went on to say that until the change in legislation comes into effect, the Council is unable to issue badges to applicants who do not have associated mobility issues.
27. The Council expressed its sympathy about Mr Y’s situation. It went on to encourage Mrs X to reapply for Mr Y’s blue badge once the extended scheme comes into force.

My investigation

28. During my investigation, I suggested to the Council that given the stage the new guidance is at, it might wish to exercise its discretion and issue Mr Y a blue badge in advance of August.
29. The Council said the Government only issued the eligibility and assessment guidance for ‘hidden disabilities’ in June 2019. Therefore, the Council did not have the opportunity to exercise discretion at any point during previous correspondence with Mrs X.
30. The Council has agreed to re-assess Mr Y’s application from April 2018 once the new legislation comes into force in August. It said it would require various information including proof of Mr Y’s eligibility for PIP under ‘planning and following a journey’ to be resubmitted.
31. The Council confirmed, if the required information is submitted to support the application, the Blue Badge team will make arrangements to assess the application as soon as possible. Subject to the criteria being met, a badge will be issued as soon as possible after the new regulations come into force.

Analysis

32. Under the new guidance, Mr Y would be eligible for a badge subject to further assessment. He receives the PIP mobility component and has 12 ‘planning and following journeys’ points under Descriptor F.
33. Mr Y would need 10 points specifically under Descriptor E to be eligible without further assessment.
34. The Council argued when it made its decision in May 2018, it could not know what the new guidance would say.
35. The Council has followed the correct processes in assessing this application. It outlined clear reasons for not awarding a blue badge in its decision letter. I have found no fault in how the Council managed this application.

Back to top

Final decision

36. The Council was not at fault in how it determined Mr Y’s blue badge application.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman