Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s blue badge application process. This is because the Council’s actions did not cause Mr X significant enough injustice for us to investigate. The Council also properly reached its eventual decision.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council repeatedly closed his blue badge applications without making substantive decisions and then assessed his application using the wrong criteria.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. People may qualify for a blue badge if they are unable to walk, experience considerable difficulty when walking or are at serious risk when walking.
7. Mr X says he applied four times without receiving a substantive decision because the Council claimed he had not submitted the correct documents, but Mr X says he had. After Mr X complained to the Ombudsman, but before we started considering the complaint, the Council made a substantive decision that he did not qualify for the blue badge. Mr X used the Council’s appeal procedure which confirmed the refusal.
8. The evidence I have seen shows Council properly assessed Mr X’s application under the hidden disability criteria and decided not to award a blue badge. The Council considered the information Mr X provided. The appeal notes showed the assessor considered his medical condition and there was a proper consideration of each point and government guidance. The evidence suggests the Council reached this decision properly. So, as paragraph 3 explained, I cannot criticise the Council’s decision, although Mr X can disagree with the Council.
9. We acknowledge Mr X’s complaints about the alleged faults earlier in the process, but there is no reason to believe that an earlier decision would have led to a different outcome. Therefore, there is not significant enough injustice to warrant us investigating whether there was any Council fault earlier in the process.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman