Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly consider her application for a blue badge under the hidden disabilities criteria including referral to an expert assessor. She says she feels discriminated against because her disabilities are invisible. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered Miss X’s application for a blue badge.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to properly consider her application for a blue badge under the hidden disabilities criteria and failed to get an opinion form an expert assessor.
2. Miss X says she feels discriminated against because her disabilities are invisible and that the Council has let her down.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• sent my draft decision to both the Council and the complainant and taken account of their comments in reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Blue Badge Scheme

6. 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.
7. Since August 2019 the guidance has included the introduction of assessment criteria for people with severe mobility problems caused by non-visible (‘hidden’) disabilities.
8. The DfT guidance 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 for a badge. 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. 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. If an applicant is unhappy with the outcome of an assessment, they may ask the council to review the decision.

Key facts

12. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
13. Miss X is disabled. She has Crohn’s disease and autism. As a result she suffers from pain and anxiety. Miss X says this affects her ability to confidently leave the house independently. The combination of her conditions means she worries when she is out that she will not cope especially if she needs the toilet urgently. For this reason, Miss X applied to the Council for a blue badge.
14. Miss X submitted an application to the Council. On that application she explained the Crohn’s means she often has an urgent need for the toilet or risks severe pain. She said the autism causes her to have extreme anxiety which in turn triggers the Crohn’s. Miss X explained the two conditions affect each other. She explained that when there is a flare up of her Crohn’s, she can experience horrendous pain causing her to be hunched over and sweating. She also mentioned feeling fatigued requiring her to sit down and rest.
15. Miss X included a letter from her GP with her initial application. He confirmed her medical conditions and said that she requested that she is able to park near to her destination to help with better access to toilet facilities and her fatigue. An occupational therapist considered Miss X’s application and refused it saying she had not provided sufficient evidence to qualify.
16. Miss X immediately submitted an appeal. The Council asked her to provide medical evidence. Miss X again asked her GP to provide medical evidence. The GP stated Miss X is prone to Crohn’s flare ups which can cause significant pain. He said that in addition to the pain, Miss X struggles with severe anxiety when having flare ups due to the risk of incontinence. He said a blue badge would help Miss X to park so she can use a public toilet more quickly which will help with the pain, anxiety and fear of incontinence.
17. Miss X’s appeal was considered by a different occupational therapist. The OT took the view Miss X had not provided any information regarding mobility difficulties and eligibility for a blue badge does not cover proximity to public lavatories. The application was refused on appeal.
18. The Council did not use an expert assessor in this case. The initial application and subsequent appeal were considered and determined by occupational therapists. DfT guidance says that a referral to an expert assessor is not necessary if it is self evident the applicant does not meet the criteria. As there is no requirement to use an expert assessor, I cannot say the Council was at fault for not doing so in this case.

Analysis

19. Miss X says she feels discriminated against because her disabilities are invisible. She believes that without a blue badge she will become housebound and will not be able to achieve her career goals.
20. I am satisfied the Council followed the correct process to consider Miss X’s blue badge application. She submitted the form with a supporting letter from her GP. The Council considered and refused the application within one week. After submitting an appeal request, the Council sent a medical proforma to Miss X for her to have completed. It then reviewed and determined the appeal request within eight days of receiving the medical evidence.
21. There is no delay by the Council in this case. Miss X chose to get her GP to provide medical evidence twice. It was open to her to ask another health professional such as a surgeon or consultant. The medical evidence submitted was properly considered and the Council then used its professional judgement to determine Miss X’s eligibility.
22. It is my understanding that Miss X can walk more than 80 metres which means the Council considered her blue badge application under the hidden disability criteria. The medical conditions Miss X has are not an automatic qualification for a blue badge. The hidden disability criteria requires the applicant to show that during the course of a journey they experience very considerable difficulty waling which may include very considerable psychological distress or be at risk of serious harm or pose a risk of serious harm to any other person. The Council was not satisfied Miss X had provided sufficient evidence to show this is the case.
23. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether the person disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
24. I have considered the steps the organisation took and the information it took account of when deciding to refuse the blue badge application and appeal. There is no fault in how it took the decision and I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I will now complete my investigation as there is no evidence of fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman