Summary: The Ombudsman has discontinued our investigation into Ms B’s complaint. The Council has agreed to reconsider her son’s disabled parking badge application using the new government guidance, so it is unlikely further investigation would lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms B, complains on behalf of her son, whom I refer to as Mr C. Ms B says the Council refused Mr C’s application for a disabled parking badge because he does not have considerable difficulty walking. However, she says he has severe autism and needs the badge because he has little road safety awareness, so has to be parked close to his destination.

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 or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I spoke to Ms B about her complaint, and considered information provided by Ms B and the Council.
4. I wrote to Ms B and the Council with my draft decision and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council refused Mr C’s disabled parking badge renewal application in January 2019, and confirmed its decision in response to Ms B’s appeal in March.
6. The Council said it had refused Mr C’s application because he had fewer than eight points on the ‘moving around’ section of his personal independence payment (PIP), and did not have considerable difficulty walking.
7. However, the Council acknowledged Mr C’s autism, and that he had 12 ‘planning and following journeys’ PIP points. It said the government would be issuing new criteria for the assessment of people with ‘hidden disabilities’ who applied for badges. It said:

The guidance is due to be clarified in 2019 although we do not have an exact date yet, and the details of the criteria are yet to be agreed. As a result, Local Authorities … are not yet awarding badges on these grounds. We would suggest that you keep an eye on press reports and to re -apply when the details … are clarified.

8. The new government guidance was issued in June 2019. It says an applicant will be eligible for a badge without further assessment if they receive the PIP mobility component and have 10 or more ‘planning and following journeys’ points.
9. This new guidance is not in force until August 2019, and the Council cannot have considered it when it made its decision on Mr C’s application and appeal earlier in the year.
10. However, the Council has agreed to reconsider Mr C’s application with the new guidance in mind.
11. Given that the Council has agreed to do this, it is unlikely further investigation would lead to a different outcome, so I have discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I have discontinued my investigation into Ms B’s complaint. The Council has agreed to reconsider Mr C’s disabled parking badge application using the new government guidance, so it is unlikely further investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman