Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant does not qualify 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 Ms X, disagrees with the Council’s decision that she does not qualify for a Blue Badge. Ms X was offended by a suggestion she should wear a high visibility vest in car parks. Ms X wants an apology and 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 Ms X and the Council. This includes the mobility assessment and medical evidence. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to 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. The guidance says that people who walk slowly will not be eligible if that is the only qualifying factor.
7. Ms X applied for a Blue Badge. She submitted a letter from her doctor which said she may experience difficulties after walking longer distances. The Council did a mobility assessment. The assessor explored Ms X’s medical issues, pain, falls and whether she uses any walking aids. The assessor watched Ms X walk 220 metres without using a walking aid and with no evidence of significant pain or shortness of breath. The assessor noted Ms X walked at a slow speed but saw no problems linked to balance, posture, rhythm or coordination.
8. During the assessment Ms X said she sometimes felt scared in car parks because she is of short stature and drivers do not always see her. The assessor suggested she wear a high visibility vest or reflective arm or wrist bands. Ms X was offended by this suggestion.
9. 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. I have no power to award a badge and cannot decide if Ms X is eligible for a badge.
10. The Council considered the information Ms X provided on her 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. Ms X says her feet may be swollen by the end of the day, the more she walks the harder walking becomes, and she did become a little out of breath. But, these are all points the assessor considered. In addition, the decision to refuse a badge is consistent with the guidance because Ms X walked more than 80 metres and speed is not a qualifying factor when considered in isolation. I can only consider if there was fault in the way the Council reached the decision and, while I acknowledge Ms X disagrees with the decision, I see no suggestion of fault in the way the decision was reached.
11. I appreciate Ms X was offended by the suggestion she could wear high visibility clothing. However, the assessor was responding to Ms X’s concern that she felt scared in car parks and, in that context, the suggestion was not inappropriate and does not require an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. 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