Summary: Mr X complains the Council did not award him a Blue Badge. He says this make it more difficult for him to visit shops and use local facilities. The Council was at fault for issuing a decision that was not in line with guidance. This did not cause Mr X personal injustice, but we have recommended action to prevent recurrence of the fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council rejected his appeal and wrongly refused to issue him with a Blue Badge. He says this makes it more difficult for him to access shops and local facilities. He wants the Council to review its decision and issue him with a Blue Badge.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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

4. I have considered:
• all the information Mr X provided and discussed the complaint with him;
• the supporting documents provided by the Council. This included Mr X’s Blue Badge application, the independent mobility assessment report, his appeal documents and the Council’s decision letters; and
• relevant law and guidance
5. 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

Legal and administrative background

6. Some councils have Blue Badge schemes which help people with severe mobility problems or hidden disabilities to access goods and services, by allowing them to park close to their destination. The Department for Transport has issued guidance for councils who run Blue Badge schemes.
7. The guidance sets out two types of eligibility criteria for issuing Blue Badges: “Eligible without further assessment” and “Eligible subject to further assessment”.
8. The criteria for being eligible subject to further assessment is:
• “a person who drives regularly, has a severe disability on both arms and is unable to operate, or has considerable difficulty in operating, all or some types of parking meter;
• a person who has been certified 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 very considerable psychological distress; and
• in addition, they may be at risk of serious harm when walking – or pose when walking, a risk of serious harm to another person”.
9. The Guidance says that when considering walking disabilities that are mainly physical in nature, very considerable difficulty in walking is likely to manifest through one of more of the following:
• the amount of pain experienced;
• the degree of breathlessness;
• distance walked;
• walking speed;
• length of time walked;
• use of walking aids;
• applicant’s outdoor walking ability; and
• whether the effort of walking presents a danger to the applicant’s life or would likely lead to a serious decline in their health.
10. The guidance says assessors should also consider applicants who experience serious difficulty in walking due to non-visible (hidden) conditions. Applicants with these conditions may suffer considerable psychological distress or pose a risk to themselves or others when walking.
11. If an application is refused, the guidance strongly recommends the assessor gives the person applying a detailed explanation of the grounds for refusal. It says it is not acceptable to simply say the applicant did not meet the eligibility criteria.
12. If applicants are unhappy with the outcome of an assessment, they may appeal by asking the Council to review the decision.

What happened

13. Mr X has physical health conditions. In September 2019, he applied to the Council for a Blue Badge. He said his health conditions reduced his mobility and caused him constant pain when walking.
14. In October 2019, the Council wrote to him to say his application had been unsuccessful. It said the information he provided in his application did not meet the criteria for a Blue Badge. It said it had considered whether he had physical or hidden disabilities that affect his ability to walk but did not provide further details. It told him he could appeal the decision.
15. Mr X appealed the decision and sent the Council more evidence to support his appeal. The documents Mr X gave were dated between 2009 and 2010. He said he had had several falls resulting in injury and became breathless when walking due to his health conditions. He said he suffered very considerable distress while out and about due to his incontinence and needed to park near to public toilets and shops. The Council invited him to a face to face assessment with an independent mobility assessor.
16. The assessor noted Mr X’s medical conditions, medication, work history, falls history, report of pain, mobility aids, home adaptations and practical abilities. They noted he had some incontinence but used pads to manage this. He reported no other hidden disabilities. They considered the supporting evidence Mr X had provided. They assessed Mr X’s mobility. The assessment recorded Mr X could walk 80m but walked at a very slow pace and stopped once. They did not observe any breathlessness or fatigue. His balance was normal. They observed Mr X experienced mild pain while walking but noted Mr X reported severe pain. They considered risks due to hidden disabilities. They concluded there was no evidence he experienced psychological distress or was at risk of serious harm or posed a risk to others when walking. The assessor decided Mr X did not have very considerable difficulty in walking and did not meet the criteria for a Blue Badge.
17. The Council wrote to Mr X with its appeal decision. It told him the appeal had been unsuccessful. It included details of the mobility assessment and the assessor’s conclusions. It said he did not meet the requirements for a Blue Badge as set out in the Department of Transport scheme guidance.
18. Mr X was unhappy with this decision and brought his complaint to us.

Findings

19. 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.
20. The mobility assessor considered all the elements listed in the Blue Badge Guidance. The assessor watched Mr X walking 80m and noted it was at a slow pace, but did not see any fatigue or breathlessness. They noted Mr X’s report of severe pain but only observed mild pain. They considered the supporting evidence he sent in. They considered his report of psychological distress but found no evidence of this during the mobility assessment.
21. The Council carried out the assessment in line with the Blue Badge guidance. There is no evidence of fault in how it reached its decision, so I cannot question the decision made.
22. The decision letter was not in line with the guidance. It did not include details of why Mr X was refused a blue badge. However, this did not cause Mr X any injustice as he asked for an appeal and the Council offered a mobility assessment.

Back to top

Agreed actions

23. Within three months of the date of my final decision the Council will:
• remind decision makers that decision letters should include details of the reasons for refusal.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I have completed my investigation. I have found evidence of fault by the Council and recommended action to prevent reoccurrence of this fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman