Summary: the Council failed to take into account all the evidence provided when refusing Miss B’s application for a blue badge. An apology and arrangement for a further appeal is satisfactory remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss B, complained the Council failed to properly consider her application for a blue badge. Miss B says without a blue badge she cannot undertake certain activities.

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’. 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)
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. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Miss B's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
5. Miss B 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

What should have happened

6. The Government has issued guidance on the blue badge scheme (the guidance). This says people who may be issued with a badge after further assessment are those who are more than three years old and may be described as one or more of the following:
• a person who drives a vehicle regularly, has a severe disability in both arms and is unable to operate, or has considerable difficulty in operating, all, or some types of parking meter; or
• 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;
• in addition, they may be at risk of serious harm when walking - or pose, when walking, a risk of serious harm to any other person.
7. The guidance says any of the above three types of difficulty whilst walking could potentially be caused by a physical disability, or by a non-visible (hidden) disability. In either case, the disability experienced by the applicant must endure for at least three years.
8. The guidance says risk of serious harm reflects that some non-visible (hidden) disabilities give rise to behaviour or lack of situational awareness that present safety risks for the disabled person or for others.
9. The guidance says when considering whether an individual may qualify for a blue badge, local authorities must recognise that the following could arise due to non-visible (hidden) considerations:
• unable to walk;
• very considerable difficulty whilst walking during the course of a journey, which may include very considerable psychological distress;
• risk of serious harm, when walking during the course of a journey, or pose, when walking, a risk of serious harm to any other person.
10. Research commissioned by the Department for Transport in 2019 to support the development of the guidance suggested it could be reasonable for local authorities to consider the frequency with which an applicant experiences very considerable difficulty whilst walking during the course of a journey, or presents a risk of serious harm to themselves/others when walking during the course of a journey and it should be 'more often than not' when determining eligibility for a blue badge.
11. The guidance says it is considered good practice for blue badge application processes to allow for people to identity any coping strategies they use, and how effectively these work in practice.
12. The Council’s concessionary travel supplementary guidance (the Council’s guidance) says the assessor should consider what/whether coping strategies and/or treatment the applicant has employed in the past to help manage their symptoms/behaviours/safety when walking between a vehicle and their destination. It says the assessor should consider the effectiveness of these coping strategies. It also says the assessor should consider the type, frequency and context of difficulties when transiting between the vehicle and the destination and whether those difficulties can reasonably be managed through coping/management strategies. If they can, the criteria is not met. It says evidence from third-party sources should be provided relating to the treatment/use of coping strategies and the effectiveness of these over a period of time.

What happened

13. Miss B applied for a blue badge and provided supporting evidence. The Council assessed that application and decided Miss B did not qualify for a blue badge. The Council said it did not have sufficient evidence Miss B had an enduring and substantial disability that meant all or most of the time, and despite coping strategies, she:
• experienced considerable psychological distress when transiting between the vehicle and destination and/or
• was at risk of serious harm to themselves or any other person when transiting between the vehicle and the destination.
14. The Council said travelling with support when using non-public transport was a reasonable and practical adjustment and coping strategy to facilitate Miss B's travel and appeared to be effective in meeting her needs.
15. Miss B appealed against that decision and provided supporting evidence. The organisation that submitted the appeal on Miss B’s behalf referred to her considerable psychological distress when transiting between a vehicle and her destination. Miss B referred to being a serious harm to herself or any other person when transiting between the vehicle and her destination.
16. Miss B provided a letter from the consultant psychological therapies lead who confirmed Miss B experienced considerable psychological distress when making the transition between a vehicle and her destination. He referred to coping strategies Miss B had to help her manage that including use of taxis, using headphones in taxis to avoid contact with the driver and having somebody accompany her. He said those coping strategies had not always worked, particularly when there was uncertainty about the destination when taking a taxi, when a family member could not accompany her or where Miss B did not want her family member involved with an appointment. He stated a blue badge would allow Miss B to travel with greater ease and less stress and anxiety which would enable her to live a more independent life. Miss B also provided a letter from her social worker who confirmed the same issues.
17. The Council refused that appeal. In refusing the appeal the Council referred to the information Miss B provided from the consultant psychological therapies lead confirming her diagnosis and psychological distress when making the transition between a vehicle and her destination. The letter noted though the consultant had also confirmed Miss B had strategies in place to manage using a taxi service such as using headphones and advised her to continue to use those strategies. The Council also noted Miss B did not have impaired mobility and suggested she use her headphones as a strategy when mobilising from point A to point B to reduce her anxiety. The Council also noted the option of using hospital transport was available to her.

Analysis

18. I have some concerns with how the Council considered Miss B’s appeal against its decision to refuse her application for a blue badge. As I say earlier in this statement, Miss B provided supporting evidence from the consultant psychological therapies lead and a letter from her social worker. I recognise the notes kept by the assessor refer to the two documents provided. However, both the assessment documentation completed by the assessor and the decision letter on the appeal rely on evidence the consultant psychological therapies lead provided about Miss B’s coping strategies when managing the transition between a vehicle and her destination. In both the assessment documentation and the decision letter the Council confirmed Miss B did not qualify for a blue badge partly as it was satisfied Miss B had coping strategies in place to manage the difficulties transitioning from a vehicle to a destination. However, the consultant’s letter made clear although there were coping strategies in place those coping strategies did not always work. In particular, the consultant referred to Miss B continuing to experience difficulties when using taxis when there was uncertainty about the destination. The consultant also referred to Miss B’s family members not always being able to accompany her to appointments, Miss B not wanting family members to attend some of her medical appointments and the effect that then had on her. There is no evidence either in the assessment paperwork or the decision letter to show the Council considered that information.
19. I am concerned about that, particularly because the Council’s guidance for assessors makes clear part of the assessment will involve consideration of coping strategies employed but also the effectiveness of those coping strategies and the frequency and context of difficulties when transiting between the vehicle and the destination. Given the consultant had specifically referred to issues with the coping strategies I would have expected the Council to consider that information before deciding whether to award Miss B a blue badge. Failure to do that is fault.
20. I cannot reach a safe conclusion about whether the Council would have awarded a blue badge had it properly considered the issues the consultant raised with Miss B’s coping strategies. However, in the absence of any evidence of consideration of those issues I cannot say the Council properly considered the application for a blue badge. I therefore recommended the Council apologise to Miss B and arrange for a further appeal which should take into account all the evidence Miss B provided. Following that appeal the Council should then communicate its decision to Miss B. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.

Back to top

Agreed action

21. Within one month of my decision the Council should:
• apologise to Miss B for not considering her appeal properly; and
• arrange a further appeal and communicate the decision to Miss B following that appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

22. I have completed my investigation and uphold the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman