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 Mrs X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to award 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’. 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 the mobility assessment report and a letter from Mrs X’s doctor. I invited Mrs X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Blue badge government guidance

5. People qualify for a badge if they are unable to walk, experience considerable difficulty when walking or are at serious risk of harm when walking.
6. 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. It also says that people should be assessed taking into account any walking aids they normally use.
7. Difficulty getting out of a car is not a qualifying condition for a badge.

Back to top

What happened

8. Mrs X has arthritis in her hips and back. She has had falls and is worried she will fall again. Mrs X applied for a Blue Badge.
9. The Council did a mobility assessment. The assessor noted Mrs X’s medical problems and that she walks with a wheeled roller. She was aware that Mrs X has fallen. She noted Mrs X fell in 2018 and broke her wrist and had a fall at home in 2019. The assessor was aware the falls had caused a loss of confidence. The assessor watched Mrs X walk 80 metres using her frame. Mrs X walked at a very slow speed. The assessor observed mild shortness of breath and minor problems negotiating a slope. Overall, the assessor found that Mrs X was able to walk 80 metres with only mild limitation. The Council decided Mrs X does not qualify for a badge.
10. Mrs X appealed and submitted a letter from her doctor. The letter confirmed that Mrs X has arthritis and said she had reported she could walk 100 yards (91 metres). The Council considered the appeal but did not change the decision.
11. Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decision. She says she is at serious risk of harm when walking due to her falls.

Assessment

12. 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.
13. The Council considered the information Mrs X provided and the findings of the mobility assessor. The assessment notes show the assessor considered pain, distance, balance, breathlessness, walking aids and falls. 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 Mrs X walked more than 80 metres and speed is not a qualifying factor when considered in isolation. In addition, difficulty getting out of a car is not a qualifying condition.
14. Mrs X provided medical evidence. However, this did not state Mrs X was unable to walk 80 metres.
15. Mrs X says she is at risk when walking due to her falls. But, the assessor was aware of her falls but decided they did not meet the threshold of putting Mrs X at serious risk of harm.

Back to top

Final decision

16. 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