Summary: Mrs X complained the Council refused her application for a Blue Badge and Taxicard without providing her with reasons. There was no fault in the way the Council considered Mrs X application. However, the Council was at fault for failing to show Mrs X how it made its decision.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council refused her application for a Blue Badge and Taxicard without providing reasons. She says she meets the requirements under the Department for Transport guidance, but the Council has not followed this when making its decision.

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’. 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)
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)
4. 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

5. As part of the investigation I have considered the following:
• The complaint and the documents provided by the complainant’s representative.
• Documents provided by the Council and its comments in response to my enquiries.
• The Blue Badge Scheme Local Authority Guidance
• The Council’s Blue Badge and Taxicard Policy and Assessment Procedure
6. I have written to Mrs X and the Council with my draft decision and given them an opportunity to comment.

Back to top

What I found

7. A Taxicard provides reduced fares in London taxi’s and is available to London residents suffering from a disability or condition which prevents or limits their use of public transport.
8. A Blue Badge entitles drivers or passengers with a disability or mobility condition to park nearer to where they are going.
9. Some people are eligible for a Blue Badge or Taxicard without further assessment. This includes those receiving the higher rate of the mobility part of the Disability Living Allowance or those who have eight points or more under the ‘moving around’ activity of the mobility component of the Personal Independence Payment (PIP).
10. Other people are eligible subject to further assessment if they:
• drive a vehicle regularly, have a severe disability in both arms and cannot operate, or have notable difficulty in using, all or some types of parking meter; or
• have a permanent and substantial disability that causes inability to walk or very great difficulty walking.
11. The Department for Transport has issued guidance to councils for providing Blue Badges to disabled people with severe mobility problems.
12. The guidance says eligibility should be decided by an independent mobility assessor and sets out the factors considered when assessing a person’s mobility. This includes distance, speed of walking, the length of time an applicant can walk for, excessive pain, breathlessness, manner of walking and use of walking aids.
13. Where a council refuses an application, it must let the applicant know why. The Department for Transport strongly recommends that every applicant receives a detailed explanation of the grounds for refusal. It is not enough to simply state the applicant did not meet the eligibility criteria.

Back to top

What happened

14. Mrs X has a disability affecting her walking. She applied for a Blue Badge and Taxicard on 18 June 2018. The test relevant to Mrs X is that someone must have a permanent and substantial disability that causes inability to walk or very great difficulty walking. She was assessed by an occupational therapist on 21 August 2018.
15. The Council wrote to Mrs X with its decision on 28 August 2018. It stated that, while Mrs X had difficulty walking, the difficulty was not serious enough to meet the standard for a Blue Badge or Taxicard.
16. Mrs X’s representative, Ms Y, contacted the Council on 20 September 2018 to confirm her plan to appeal the decision. However, Ms Y said the Council had not provided any reasons for its decision and this made it difficult to appeal. She asked the Council to provide reasons for its refusal and details of its decision.
17. On 10 October 2018 the Council wrote to Mrs X to offer a meeting to discuss and assess her mobility needs.
18. Ms Y replied to the Council on 11 October 2018 to say that it had still not provided reasons for its decision as asked. She quoted Department for Transport guidance which stipulates authorities must provide reasons for decisions and stated Mrs X would not attend another assessment until the Council complied.
19. The Council wrote to Mrs X on 8 November 2018 stating that it had closed her review because she did not attend the further mobility assessment.
20. On 16 November 2018 Ms Y made a formal complaint to the Council on Mrs X’s behalf. She said the Council ignored her emails asking it to explain its refusal and did not follow Department for Transport guidance on providing reasons for its decision.
21. The Council responded to the complaint on 17 December 2018. It provided the occupational therapist’s comments about why it rejected Mrs X’s application.
22. On 15 January 2019 Ms Y contacted the Council to provide grounds for an appeal against its decision on Mrs X Blue Badge and Taxicard application. Ms Y stated the observations made in Mrs X assessment should have led to Mrs X receiving a Blue Badge. She said the decision was made based on Mrs X’s attendance at other activities, rather than observations on her walking ability at the assessment.
23. The Council wrote to Mrs X on 12 February 2019 to offer her another assessment.
24. In response, Ms Y took her complaint to stage 2 of the process as the Council had ignored the points raised in Mrs X appeal.
25. On 28 March 2019 the Council wrote to Mrs X to say it closed her review because she did not attend a further assessment.
26. The Council wrote to Mrs X on 4 April 2019 to offer a further assessment. It then sent a further letter on 9 May 2019 to say it closed her review because she did not attend the assessment.

Response to enquiries

27. I asked how the Council had considered the Guidance on assessing breathlessness, speed and distance during Mrs X’s walking assessment.
28. The Council confirmed it did consider this. It provided me with a copy of Mrs X’s assessment and the template its assessors use.

Back to top

Analysis

29. Blue Badge and Taxicard decisions involve a significant degree of professional judgement and it is not the Ombudsman’s role to decide whether Mrs X qualifies. As paragraph 3 explained, I would only criticise such a decision if the assessor did not make it properly. Therefore, I have considered the decision-making process.
30. Councils should assess applications by considering information applicants provide about their medical condition and mobility and by assessing an applicant’s mobility in person. The Council followed these points in Mrs X’s case, including having an occupational therapist conduct a mobility assessment.
31. There is a lack of detail about how the Council communicated its decision to Mrs X. It simply told her she did not meet the criteria, and this is exactly what the guidance says a council should not do. The guidance is clear that councils should provide detailed reasons for their decisions which are specific to the applicant. The Council did not do this. That was fault.
32. Mrs X thought that she met the criteria for a Blue Badge and Taxicard, as set out by the Department for Transport. She thought the Council had wrongly decided her care based on her social activities rather than her walking ability on the day of the assessment.
33. To consider whether the Council made its decision properly, I must be able to work out how its decision was made. Based on the Council’s refusal letter and later correspondence with Mrs X, I cannot, with any confidence, do so. That was fault.
34. Once the Council provided me with a copy of Mrs X assessment it became clear why it had refused her application. The Council uses a scoring system which it calculates after measuring the distance an applicant can walk, their speed of walking, their ability to walk outdoors and use stairs, their pain, breathing and manner of walking. Each category receives a score (from 0 to 3 or 0 to 4) and then the assessor calculates a total score. To receive a Blue Badge and Taxicard an applicant must achieve a total score of 12 or more. Mrs X received a score of 11.
35. The categories the Council considers when assessing applicants is compatible with the suggested categories in the government guidance. No important feature of mobility (as suggested by the guidance) is absent from the Council’s assessment form.
36. In summary, the Council did properly consider Mrs X’s application and made its decision properly. I cannot question the professional judgement of the assessor who made the decision. However, there was fault in the way the Council communicated its decision to Mrs X. This caused an injustice to Mrs X because she was uncertain about why the Council refused her application and thought she met the criteria. She was also put to unnecessary time and trouble because the Council could have easily cleared up the situation by providing a copy of Mrs X’s assessment or explaining its scoring system. This may have prevented the need for Mrs X to bring her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Recommended action

37. Within one month of my final decision the Council should:
• Apologise to Mrs X for not providing her with clear and detailed reasons for its refusal of her application.
• Invite Mrs X to a new assessment with a different assessor and provide her with detailed reasons for its resulting decision.
38. In future the Council should ensure refusal letters contain detailed reasons for its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

39. I have completed my investigation. There was no fault in the way the Council considered Mrs X’s application for a Blue Badge and Taxicard. However, the Council was at fault for failing to show Mrs X how it made its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman