Summary: Miss B complained about the Council’s decision not to issue her a Blue Badge. We have found there was fault in how the Council recorded its decision not to offer Miss B a face-to face assessment, but this has not caused Miss B a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Miss B complained about the Council’s decision not to issue her a Blue Badge. Specifically, she complained about how the Council assessed the amount of pain she experienced and how that impacted on her mobility. She said the decision not to issue a Blue Badge meant she was in a lot of pain every day and sometimes she struggled to go where she wanted to.
2. Miss B would like to Council to consider her individual circumstances and re-assess her eligibility for a blue bade.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
5. 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

6. I considered the information provided by Miss B and the Council. This included a copy of the Council’s correspondence with Miss B.
7. I referred to the Blue Badge Scheme Local Authority Guidance (England) June 2019 and the Disabled Person’s Parking Badges Act 2013.
8. Miss B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Blue Badge scheme

9. The Department for Transport (Dft) has issued guidance to councils for providing Blue Badges. The Blue Badge scheme entitles drivers or passengers with mobility problems to park nearer to their destination.
10. To qualify for a Blue Badge, an applicant must be assessed by their council as either ‘eligible without further assessment’ or ‘eligible subject to further assessment’.
11. ‘Subject to further assessment’ means the council will assess them to decide if they meet the requirements for a Blue Badge.
12. It is up to the relevant council to decide if an applicant meets the eligibility criteria for a Blue Badge.
13. The Council said its Blue Badge assessments are led by a team of Health and Care Professionals. They have considerable experience and knowledge of difficulties that disabled people experience accessing goods and services and meet the Blue Badge requirement of an expert assessor.
14. The Council uses an initial screening tool which scores applicants depending on whether they have an enduring and substantial disability and other factors. It has indicative threshold scores to guide the assessor in deciding whether to:
• issue a Blue Badge;
• complete a further desktop assessment;
• refer the applicant for a face-to-face assessment; or
• refuse the Blue Badge.
15. The assessment form says the scores are indicative not prescriptive and should not override the assessor’s professional clinical reasoning.

What happened

16. In October 2020 Miss B, who has a physical disability, applied to the Council for a Blue Badge.
17. The Council carried out a desk top assessment and Miss B scored the minimum points for it to refer her for a face-to-face assessment. The assessor recorded Miss B had not provided enough evidence to support her having an enduring and substantial disability that would cause inability to access goods and services without a badge. The assessor decided not to carry out a face-to-face assessment, but did not give a reason for this decision.
18. The Council wrote to Miss B and told her it declined her Blue Badge application because it did not have enough clinical evidence to decide her eligibility. The Council told Miss B what other evidence she could provide so it can revisit her eligibility for a Blue Badge.
19. Miss B appealed the Council’s decision and provided further evidence with her review request. The evidence Miss B provided was not all the evidence the Council asked for.
20. The Council reviewed the application and refused it due to lack of supporting evidence of the severity of pain Miss B reported. The Council accepted the enduring nature of Miss B’s condition. The Council said it did not have enough supporting professional evidence to show the health issues Miss B reported were causing her very severe symptoms which significantly limited the distance she could walk.
21. Miss B remained unhappy with the Council’s decision and complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

22. The Council’s assessor could decide, based on the information they had, whether a face-to-face assessment was required. In each case, they should clearly explain their reasons for the decision on the Council’s assessment form. The assessor explained why they considered they needed more evidence from Miss B, but they did not clearly record why they did not offer her a face-to-face assessment. This is fault, but it has not caused Miss B a significant injustice. The Council gave an opportunity to Miss B to provide further supporting evidence that it considered necessary to revisit Miss B’s eligibility.
23. When determining Miss B’s Blue Badge application appeal the Council considered if the further evidence Miss B’s provided demonstrated she experienced a very considerable difficulty whilst walking. It decided it did not do so and that it was able to make this decision without a face-to-face assessment. There is no fault in Council’s approach. I understand that Miss B disagrees with Council’s assessment of her pain, but this is a subjective experience and I am satisfied the Council made its decision in line with the DfT guidance having considered all the evidence Miss B provided.
24. The guidance requires the Council to provide a detailed written response explaining why it has refused an applicant a Blue Badge. The Council rejected Miss B’s application because she did not provide sufficient medical evidence supporting it. It gave a detailed explanation for why it rejected her application and suggested what documents would evidence the severity of the pain she experienced. The Council was not at fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

25. Within the three months of this final decision the Council will:
• Provide evidence of how it has reviewed and updated its desktop assessment process.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I completed my investigation and found there was fault in how the Council recorded its decision not to offer Miss B a face-to face assessment. However this has not caused Miss B a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman