Summary: The Council failed to properly consider Mrs X’s application for a blue badge. It recorded she was only able to walk with excessive labour or pain but failed to account for this in its decision. It also failed to consider the efficacy of pain medication.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the way the Council dealt with her application for a 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’. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered the complaint, and supporting information provided by Mrs X, which includes correspondence between her and the Council. I have considered the Council’s assessment of Mrs X’s mobility, and its response to her appeal. I have also taken account of relevant legislation. Both Mrs X and the Council have had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this document.

Back to top

What I found

The Blue Badge scheme

4. The Blue Badge scheme is to help disabled people with severe mobility problems access goods and services by allowing them to park near their destination. The scheme provides parking concessions for blue badge holders. Councils are responsible for the day-to-day administration and enforcement of the scheme. This includes assessing whether people are eligible for a badge
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.
6. New rules came into force on 30 August 2019. These are designed to make it easier for people with problems that are not exclusively linked to the physical act of walking to qualify for a badge.

What happened

7. Mrs X has chronic pain as result of surgery meant to repair a pelvic problem.
8. Mrs X applied for a blue badge. She explained she has walking problems and experiences significant pain when walking. She provided supporting medical evidence.
9. The Council undertook an assessment of Mrs X, which included an assessment of her mobility. I have seen a copy of the assessment. The assessor noted Mrs X’s medical conditions and confirmed she provided full medical evidence to support her diagnosis. He also noted the “impacting condition” was permanent and that she reported constant pain with any movement.
10. Mrs X provided information about prescribed medication. She says the assessor did not enquire about the efficacy of the medication.
11. The assessor watched Mrs X walk 80 metres in total without stopping. He reported she experienced “continuous perineal pain when walking”. Section E of the assessment records Mrs X was only able to walk with excessive labour or excessive pain.
12. The assessor recorded Mrs X did not meet the eligibility criteria for a blue badge because “the applicant would have to demonstrate severe discomfort due to pain or breathlessness that impacted on their ability to walk and would be unable to walk 30m or only able to walk 80m with very considerable difficulty. They therefore do not meet the criteria for a blue badge at present…”.
13. Mrs X appealed the decision and provided supporting documents. A ‘desk-based review’ of the decision was completed. The Council refused the appeal.
14. Mrs X believes the Council has not properly considered the severity of pain she experiences whilst walking or the impact on her afterwards. She also says the Council failed to consider the efficacy of pain medication.

Analysis

15. It is not my role to decide whether Mrs X is eligible for a blue badge or give a view about the degree to which she meets the relevant criteria. My role is to consider whether the Council followed the correct process in coming to a decision. In this case I find the Council failed to do so.
16. The assessor’s notes of Mrs X’s mobility assessment are somewhat contradictory. The assessor recorded Mrs X was in continual pain whilst walking and was only able to walk with excessive labour or pain but refused a blue badge because Mrs X did not demonstrate severe discomfort whilst walking. It appears the assessor refused Mrs X a blue badge simply because she walked 80m without stopping. The decision does not take account of the information recorded about pain.
17. There are also no notes which show the assessor considered the efficacy of pain medication Mrs X takes.
18. The assessment is flawed.
19. The Council’s fault caused Mrs X an injustice because she was denied the opportunity of having her application for a blue badge properly considered. She has also been put to time and trouble pursuing the complaint.

Agreed action

20. The Council will within four weeks of the final decision carry out a review of the decision not to grant a blue badge. Rather than conducting a fresh mobility assessment, the Council should review the decision by;

• taking account of the notes the assessor made about the excessive pain Mrs X experiences whilst walking and consider the impact afterwards
• consider the efficacy of medication taken
• provide evidence of the above to this office.

Back to top

Final decision

21. The Council failed to properly consider Mrs X’s application for a blue badge. It failed to take account of relevant information about pain. It also failed to consider the efficacy of pain medication.
22. The above recommendations are a suitable way to settle the complaint.
23. It is on this basis; the complaint will be closed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman