Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Blue Badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, disagrees with the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a Blue Badge. He says the Council discriminated against him because some symptoms do not show up and he says the Council ignored his medication. Mr X wants a badge.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the application form, supporting evidence and the mobility assessment. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

5. People qualify for a badge if they are unable to walk, experience considerable difficulty when walking or are at serious risk of harm when walking.
6. The guidance says that people who can walk 80 metres and do not demonstrate very considerable difficulty in walking are not eligible for a badge. Councils should take into account factors such as pain, speed, balance, gait and shortness of breath when assessing if someone can walk 80 metres.
7. Mr X applied for a Blue Badge and supplied supporting evidence. The Council did a mobility assessment. The assessor noted Mr X’s medical issues, medication, supporting evidence and noted he has had physiotherapy. She explored his pain, breathing, falls and noted he does not use a walking aid. She watched Mr X walk 100 metres at a normal speed and saw no problems with gait, posture or balance. She observed some mild difficulties with walking but not to the extent to qualify for a badge.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely I would find fault. We do not act as an appeal body and can only consider if there is fault in the way the Council has made a decision. We have no power to award a badge and cannot decide if Mr X is eligible for a badge.
9. The Council considered the information Mr X provided on his application form and the findings of the mobility assessor. The assessment notes show the assessor considered pain, distance, balance, breathlessness and walking aids. The notes show there was a proper consideration of each point. In addition, the decision to refuse a badge is consistent with the guidance because Mr X walked more than 80 metres. The notes show the Council considered Mr X’s medication and all the medical issues he presented. There is no suggestion of fault in the way the Council made its decision and no reason to start an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman