Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue her with a blue badge. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process when determining her application to warrant us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mrs X has physical conditions which cause her anxiety. She applied for a blue badge, to allow her to park closer to her destinations, which the Council refused. Mrs X complains the Council:
1. did not listen to her during the application;
2. refused her application after a 15-minute telephone interview;
3. did not seek medical evidence about her current conditions;
4. was not clear which officer made the decision in its report.
2. Mrs X says not having a blue badge makes her life more difficult when visiting places, including work, while living with her physical conditions and the associated anxiety.

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. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information from Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. We are not an appeal body. We may only criticise a council’s decision where there is evidence of fault in its decision-making process and but for that fault officers would have made a different decision. So we consider the processes councils have followed to make their decisions. We cannot replace a council’s decision with our own or someone else’s opinion if the decision has been reached after following proper process.
7. We recognise Mrs X considers the Council did not listen to her during the blue badge process. But the Council made its decision to refuse the badge after considering her initial written application, any supporting evidence she provided, and interviewing her by telephone. The Council’s correspondence sets out its reasons for refusing the application, explaining that Mrs X’s conditions do not cause her such a level of distress and anxiety when out and about to meet the threshold for a blue badge. The officer also explains a face-to-face appointment would not inform their decision because it could not recreate circumstances able to test the level of anxiety Mrs X experiences. These were professional judgements the Council’s officers were entitled to make.
8. We note Mrs X considers the Council should have sought medical evidence from her about her conditions. It is not for officers to independently seek out medical evidence on an applicant. The blue badge process invites applicants to provide any supporting documents they wish officers to consider during the process. This can include medical evidence for physical or psychological conditions the applicant believes may be relevant to their application. It was for Mrs X as the applicant to provide officers with the evidence she wanted them to consider.
9. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with the application here to warrant us investigating. We recognise Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decision. But it is not fault for a council to properly make a decision with which someone disagrees.
10. If Mrs X has or receives new information about a worsening of her current conditions, she may wish to make a fresh blue badge application to the Council. It would then be for officers to apply the Council’s policy to deal with her submissions and process an application in the usual way.
11. Mrs X says officer A who spoke to her on the telephone told her they were not the officer who would make the decision. But she says it was officer A’s name on the decision report, stating that in their experience Mrs X did not qualify for a blue badge. It is likely officer A consulted with other officers before issuing the decision. The Council made the application decision, not solely the officer whose name is on the report. We recognise this may have caused some confusion for Mrs X, but this does not mean the Council’s decision-making process involved a fault warranting an investigation of the decision.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process when determining her blue badge application to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman