Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council assessed his application for a blue badge. The Ombudsman found inaccuracies in the assessment and appeal that meant Mr X could not be confident the Council considered his application properly. The Council has agreed to complete a further independent mobility assessment.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council assessed his application for a blue badge. He said the Council’s assessment contained errors and that information he had provided was missing. He said the Council did not address his concerns in the appeal and the section recording his prescribed medication was wrong.
2. He said the errors in both assessments have meant he is not confident the Council considered his application properly, and the assessment was not a true reflection of his condition.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (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. I read all the documents on Mr X’s blue badge application and the appeal.
6. I referred to the Blue Badge scheme local authority guidance (England) (Department for Transport).
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. The Blue Badge scheme helps disabled people with severe mobility problems access goods and services by allowing them to park near their destination. There are two sets of eligibility criteria for a blue badge which are set out in legislation.
9. Some people are ‘eligible without further assessment’, for example those who are registered blind or who receive the higher mobility component of Disability Living Allowance.
10. The second set of eligibility criteria applies to those who are ‘eligible subject to further assessment’. To be issued a badge they must have been assessed by an expert assessor as having an enduring and substantial disability which causes them, during the course of a journey to be:
• unable to walk;
• experience very considerable difficulty whilst walking, which may include considerable psychological distress; or/and
• at risk of serious harm when walking - or pose when walking, a risk of serious harm to another person.
11. The Department for Transport (DfT) has issued guidance to assist councils with these assessments. The guidance is non-statutory which means that councils are not legally obliged to adopt it. In practice, however, most councils do follow it.
12. The guidance includes a structured functional mobility assessment which sets out what assessors may wish to consider when assessing a person’s mobility. This includes factors such as:
• excessive pain when walking or as a consequence of walking;
• the degree of breathlessness as a result of walking;
• the speed and distance a person can walk;
• the applicant’s manner of walking.
13. Applicants who can walk more than 80 metres and do not display very considerable difficulty in walking through any of the above factors would not be deemed as eligible for a blue badge.
14. If applicants are unhappy with the outcome of an assessment, they may appeal by asking the Council to review the decision.

What happened

15. Mr X has arthrodesis in his left ankle- that means the bones have been surgically fused together. He also suffers from fibromyalgia causing widespread pain throughout his body. Mr X is prescribed medication for pain relief. He also uses inhalers for asthma.
16. Mr X applied to the Council for a blue badge. The Council invited him for an assessment. Mr X said he told the assessor that he became breathless when walking and that he had asthma. That information was not included in the assessment.
17. The mobility assessment recorded Mr X as initially walking briskly. However, at 50 metres he slowed considerably. Mr X told me he had to briefly stop at that point. Overall, he walked 100 metres in 3 minutes- that was 33 metres a minute. The assessor incorrectly recorded this walking pace as ‘slow’ instead of ‘very slow’. The assessor noted he walked with some labour, small steps, a reciprocal gait and a limp. He was recorded as being tired by the end of the assessment. The assessor said there was no evidence of Mr X experiencing severe pain or difficulty when walking therefore he did not meet the criteria for a blue badge.
18. Mr X appealed the Council’s decision because there were inaccuracies in the assessment. He said:
• The assessor had not recorded his self-reported levels of breathlessness.
• His ankle was fused therefore he could not move it. He questioned how the Council had assessed him as having ‘functional’ movement in his ankle.
• He had told the assessor he experienced pain following walking and that was not considered.
• He disagreed with the Council’s assessment of him not being in excessive pain.
19. The Council invited Mr X for a further assessment at a different location, but he could not get to it. He agreed to a telephone appeal. Mr X said in that telephone conversation he told the assessor he attended a pain management clinic monthly and had done for twelve months.
20. The Council did not uphold Mr X’s appeal. The reviewing officer’s assessment stated Mr X’s “walking ability was good on last assessment” and “he exceeds the distance specified in DfT guidelines”.
21. On receiving the appeal, Mr X found:
• the information section on medication was incorrect; it listed him as using paracetamol, voltarol gel and levothyroxine. Mr X told me he does not use voltarol gel or take levothyroxine. It did not list the medication he was prescribed including several prescription-only painkillers.
• the Council had not included the information he had provided about experiencing breathlessness;
• the Council had recorded him as ‘probably’ having treatment with the pain management clinic, not that he already attended it monthly.

My findings

22. 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.
23. There were several faults in the how the Council completed the mobility assessment and following appeal. These were:
• The Council marked the section of the assessment on breathlessness as ‘not applicable’. It failed to consider Mr X’s self-report about breathlessness at both the initial assessment and the appeal. It does not record him as being asthmatic. That was fault.
• The mobility assessment recorded Mr X as walking at a ‘slow pace’. Although initially quick, overall, Mr X walked at less than 40 metres per minute. That meant he walked at a ‘very slow pace’. Failure to correctly identify his pace as part of the assessment and review was fault.
• The section on medication in the appeal contains incorrect medication and does not record the prescribed painkillers Mr X takes. It did not correctly record Mr X’s monthly attendance at the pain management clinic. That was fault.
• The appeal described Mr X’s walking as good at assessment. That appears to contradict the assessment that said his walking slowed considerably after 50 meters, that he walked with ‘some labour’ and that he was ‘somewhat fatigued’ by the end of assessment.
24. The above inaccuracies within the assessment and appeal has meant that I cannot be confident the Council fully considered all relevant information when it completed Mr X’s blue badge assessment.
25. The Council’s fault caused Mr X an injustice because he was denied the opportunity of having his application for a blue badge properly considered. He has also been put to time and trouble pursuing the complaint.

Agreed action

26. Within three months of my final decision the Council will complete a further independent mobility assessment of Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

27. There was fault in how the Council completed the blue badge mobility assessment and appeal for Mr X. The Council has agreed to a further mobility assessment therefore I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman