Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a blue badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to award a blue badge. He says the Council lied and made assumptions. He also says the Council should end the assessment process and award a badge based on his disability and medical evidence.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the application, medical evidence and Council assessments. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. People may 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 government 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 promotes use of mobility assessments.
7. Mr X applied for a badge. The Council considered his application, supporting evidence and did three mobility assessments (the third assessment was carried out by two assessors). The documents show the Council considered all the evidence but decided Mr X does not qualify for a badge. Mr X complained and raised many points; the complaint responses provided a detailed response.
8. 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. It is not my role to re-make the decision or decide if Mr X is eligible for a badge.
9. The Council considered the information Mr X provided on his application form and the findings of the mobility assessors. The assessment notes show the assessors considered pain, distance, balance, breathlessness, falls and walking aids. The notes show there was a proper consideration of each point and there is a degree of consistency across the three assessments. The documents show the Council considered Mr X’s medical evidence but decided it does not show he has considerable difficulty walking. The Council addressed Mr X’s complaints and answered the points he made about the assessments.
10. I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the decision and does not think the Council assessed his application correctly. However, I have not seen anything to suggest fault in the way the Council reached its decision. It considered all the information and evidence, and cross-referenced it to the eligibility rules and the guidance. The decision flows from the evidence, rules and guidance so there is no reason to start an investigation.
11. Mr X says the Council should end the assessment process and award a badge based on his medical evidence and disabilities. However, the assessment process is encouraged by the guidance and reliance solely on medical evidence is discouraged. The Council must follow the guidance which it has no power to change. Mr X could contact his MP if he thinks the rules or guidance should be changed.

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