Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an application for a Blue Badge because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to issue a Blue Badge.

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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

• I read the complaint and information provided by the Council. This includes Mrs X’s Blue Badge application, medical evidence and correspondence from the Council. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mrs X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. 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. Difficulties can include feeling considerable psychological distress when walking.
5. 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.
6. People can qualify for a badge if they have a hidden disability; this may include, for example, conditions such as autism, dementia or epilepsy.
7. Research commissioned before the Blue Badge rules were extended to include hidden disabilities found that an urgent need for a toilet was unlikely to be ameliorated by a badge. This research now forms part of the guidance.
8. Mrs X has a medical condition which means she may need urgent access to a toilet. She says this causes psychological distress and she has fears about leaving the house. Mrs X applied for a badge and submitted medical evidence. This included a letter from the hospital supporting the application and a tick to the box on the hidden disability form stating Mrs X experiences overwhelming fear in public spaces due to her medical condition.
9. The Council considered the application but decided the evidence is not sufficient to show she qualifies for a badge. It said the need to access toilets is not one of the qualifying conditions and there is no guarantee a parking space would be near a toilet. It acknowledged the evidence from the hospital, which confirms Mrs X’s health conditions, but said there is no evidence of a cognitive impairment relevant to the rules. The Council invited Mrs X to submit further medical evidence that demonstrates she experiences considerable psychological distress when walking from her car to her destination. The Council said this could include evidence from a professional regarding psychological distress as opposed to evidence about her physical health.
10. 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 made a decision. We cannot issue a badge or direct the Council to award a badge and it is not my role to decide if Mrs X is eligible for a badge.
11. The Council considered the information on Mrs X’s form and the medical evidence. It decided the evidence is not sufficient to show she qualifies for a badge under the hidden disability rules. It has, however, invited Mrs X to provide more evidence about how psychological distress affects her ability to walk. I appreciate Mrs X disagrees with the decision but I see no suggestion of fault in the way the Council reached this decision. It considered the evidence, and the guidance, and decided Mrs X does not qualify – this is a decision it was entitled to reach.
12. Mrs X says she knows someone with the same condition who has a badge. However, each application is assessed individually and on its merits. I can only consider how the Council assessed Mrs X’s application and I see no reason to start an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman