Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that she is not eligible for a Blue Badge. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X, on behalf of Ms X, complains about the Council’s decision that Ms X is not eligible for a Blue Badge.
2. Mr X says that medical evidence has been ignored which would change the decision on Ms X’s Blue Badge application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 considered the information Mr X provided as part of his complaint. I have also considered the information provided by the Council. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Department for Transport Blue Badge guidance

5. The Department for Transport issues guidance to councils for providing Blue Badges to disabled people with severe mobility problems. The guidance sets out two types of eligibility criteria for issuing Blue Badges: ‘Eligible without further assessment’ and ‘Eligible subject to further assessment’. To qualify under the latter, “an applicant must have a permanent and substantial disability that means they cannot walk, or means they have very considerable difficulty walking.”
6. The guidance identifies specific factors for councils to consider when assessing an applicant’s eligibility for a badge:
• the level of pain experienced when walking
• breathlessness
• distance and length of time to walk
• pace
• manner of walking
• use of walking aids
• the applicant’s ability to walk outdoors
• danger to life for applicant’s with serious chest and lung conditions.
7. The guidance says that applicants who can walk more than 80 metres and do not demonstrate very considerable difficulty in walking through any other factors would not be deemed as eligible.

Mobility assessment

8. Ms X applied for a Blue Badge and was asked to attend an Independent Mobility Assessment as part of this application process.
9. The Independent Mobility Assessment assessor completed an assessment of Ms X in June 2019 and determined that Ms X was not eligible for a Blue Badge.
10. Mr X says that in September 2019 Ms X was diagnosed with Lupus and that Ms X meets the criteria for a Blue Badge in light of this diagnosis.
11. The Council followed its assessment process correctly in July 2019. The assessment notes show the assessor considered pain, distance, pace, manner of walking and breathlessness. The notes show there was a proper consideration of each point. The decision to refuse a badge is consistent with the guidance.
12. Consideration was given to Ms X suffering from an untreatable condition but noted that this was still under investigation.
13. Medical information which only became available in September 2019 would not have been available for the assessor to consider in July 2019.
14. At the time that the Council carried out the assessment the Council considered that Ms X did not meet the criteria for a Blue Bade. Ms X appealed the decision. The appeal was unsuccessful.
15. The Ombudsman cannot question the outcome of a Blue Badge assessment that has not been affected by an administrative fault. Nor can he substitute his own opinion for professional judgment. Having considered the assessment and appeal I am satisfied that the Council has considered Ms X’s individual circumstances, taken account of the relevant factors and assessed her in line with the Guidance.

Back to top

Final decision

16. My decision is that the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman