Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a blue badge application. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered Mr X’s two applications. Following the submission of new information by Mr X, the Council has now issued him with a blue badge. Therefore, there is no outstanding injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council wrongly refused two blue badge applications forcing him to pay for a private report to support his case. Mr X says this has caused him distress and anxiety and he has been financially disadvantaged.

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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

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. People who experience considerable psychological distress while walking may also qualify (this is referred to as the hidden disability rules). Councils can request information from ‘expert assessors’ during the process. It for the Council to decide who constitutes an expert assessor.
6. Mr X is autistic. He applied twice for a blue badge on the basis of mobility issues and the effects of his high sensory needs when in the community because of his autism.
7. The Council refused Mr X’s application both times. It asked Mr X to send in any other information he had which detailed the issues he experienced when in the community. Mr X commissioned a report which he submitted and the Council reviewed its decision and granted him a blue badge.
8. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s previous decisions not to award him a blue badge and the need to provide additional information and complained to us.
9. I will not investigate this complaint. The Council made it initial decisions on the information it had available at that time. It was entitled to do so and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.
10. Mr X submitted additional information and the Council awarded him a blue badge. Therefore, there is nothing further to resolve. The decision to pay for a private report was made by Mr X and we would not expect the Council to reimburse him for the costs incurred.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault to justify our involvement and, furthermore, there is no outstanding injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman