Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to correctly consider his application for a Blue Badge. The Council failed to consider Mr X’s application in line with government guidance. The Council will apologise, carry out a new assessment and take action to prevent reoccurrence.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has failed to correctly consider his application for a Blue Badge.
2. He says this meant he has not received a badge and this has made attending medical appointments difficult and he has had to attend alone.

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. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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 have considered:
• The information provided by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him;
• The Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting information it provided; and
• Relevant law and guidance.
6. Mr X and the organisation 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

Law and Guidance

7. The Department for Transport’s (DfT) Blue Badge Scheme helps people with severe physical mobility problems, or other conditions affecting their mobility, to access goods and services. It does this by allowing them, or their carer, to park near their destination. The scheme gives parking concessions to Blue Badge holders. Councils are responsible for the day-to-day administration and enforcement of the scheme. This includes assessing applicants’ eligibility for the badge.
8. The DfT guidance, Blue Badge scheme Local Authority guidance (England), sets out what assessors may wish to consider when assessing a person’s mobility. The guidance is non-statutory. This means councils do not have to follow it, but most councils do. We expect councils to explain if they decide not to follow such guidance.
9. The guidance says councils must make sure they only issue badges to residents who satisfy one or more of the criteria set out in legislation.
10. There are two types of eligibility criteria. Where a person is eligible without further assessment, they will receive a Blue Badge. Where a person is eligible subject to further assessment, they have to fulfil one of two criteria to qualify. They must:

• drive a vehicle regularly, have a severe disability in both arms and be unable to operate, or have considerable difficulty operating, all or some types of parking meter; or
• have a permanent and substantial physical or hidden disability that causes inability to walk or very considerable difficulty in walking.

11. The guidance states that if it is not self-evident based on the available information whether the application falls within the descriptors above then a referral should be made to an expert assessor. The guidance further sets out that referral to an ‘expert assessor’ is unnecessary when a local authority determines that, from the information that they have about the applicant, it is self-evident that the applicant does, or does not, meet one of the ‘subject to further assessment’ eligibility criteria, for example that the applicant is clearly eligible or ineligible and further assessment would not assist the local authority in determining eligibility. The reason for this is that it would be overly burdensome for both local authorities and for applicants to require further assessment in cases where an applicant’s disability means that they are clearly eligible or ineligible.
12. Applicants who can walk more than 80 metres and do not display very considerable difficulty walking for any other reason, including very considerable psychological distress, or serious risk to themselves or others, would not be eligible.
13. Applicants who cannot walk 40 metres in a minute are considered to walk at an extremely slow pace which is likely to make walking difficult. A person who can walk this in less than a minute may have difficulty walking when considered with other factors.
14. The guidance strongly recommends that every applicant who is refused a Blue Badge should be given a detailed explanation of the grounds for refusal and it is not enough to simply state the applicant did not meet the eligibility criteria.
15. If an applicant is unhappy with the outcome of an assessment, they may ask the council to review the decision.

What happened

16. Mr X has osteoarthritis and has had two knee operations. He says walking is painful.
17. In late January 2022 he made an online application for a Blue Badge. He told the Council that he had difficulty walking and dizziness. He stated he could not walk for more than one to five minutes, took painkillers regularly and was frequently unable to walk for more than two minutes. He included a letter from his GP and evidence of his receipt of Attendance Allowance, a government benefit payment to enable older people with a disability to get help with personal support.
18. The Council wrote to Mr X in late March declining his application. It believed he was able to walk more than 50 metres. It said the GP letter did not show he had a permanent or substantial disability which caused an inability to walk or a considerable difficulty walking.
19. Mr X appealed this decision in July 2022 and provided further evidence of a physiotherapy assessment and that the NHS had given him a walking stick.
20. The Council rejected the appeal. It sent two letters confirming this in September and October. The first letter said Mr X had not provided evidence of care treatments for mobility, treatments for walking difficulties or evidence of ongoing or future treatment. In October the Council explained to Mr X that it does not issue a Blue Badge automatically to people receiving Attendance Allowance. It stated the further information Mr X provided in his appeal did not confirm he suffered from long term mobility issues. It ended explaining it was refusing the appeal under category four, ‘the supporting evidence does not confirm or illustrate a substantial, permanent, mobility impairment that meets the walking difficulties criteria’.
21. During our investigation the Council has offered to arrange a mobility assessment for Mr X.

Findings

22. The Council based its first decision on the GP evidence submitted. It decided Mr X could walk more than 50 metres unaided. During this investigation the Council said it follows the government guidance for deciding applications. Basing the decision on whether an individual can walk 50 metres and whether this is unaided is not in line with the guidance.
23. Paragraphs 4.50 to 4.54, of the Blue Badge scheme Local Authority guidance (England), covers walking distances and pace. The Council should consider the distance a person can cover, whether this is more or less than 80 metres, and how long this takes. The Council has not considered the evidence presented in line with the government guidance and this is fault.
24. The Council’s first decision did not go into any detail about how it had decided Mr X could walk 50 metres from the information presented. It said the GP letter did not show he had a permanent or substantial difficultly which causes an inability to walk or considerable difficulty. The Council did not refer to the content of the GP letter or the government criteria to explain its decision further.
25. When the Council responded to Mr X’s appeal it discussed the evidence provided and noted that this has not shown a long-term mobility issue. It explained that Mr X had not met criteria four. Within the information made available to Mr X during his application process there was no list of the criteria for rejecting applications. If the Council intends to refer to criteria, the details of these and what it means should be available. The Council should provide a detailed explanation in line with the government guidance and its failure to do this is fault.
26. I consider the lack of a more detailed explanation of the refusal has caused Mr X an injustice. It affected his ability to support his resulting review request and understand fully what further information he may have to present to the Council. The continuing lack of explanation has meant he has been concerned that his decision was not considered properly.

Back to top

Agreed action

27. Within one month the Council will:
• Apologise to Mr X.
• Reconsider Mr X’s application in accordance with the government guidance.
• Remind staff of the walking distances for assessment under the Blue Badge scheme local authority guidance (England).
• Remind staff to provide full explanations when they are refusing a Blue Badge application, explaining why they feel the criteria has not been met and how they reached this conclusion.
28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to an injustice. I have recommended remedies to address the injustice and prevent reoccurrence.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman