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, Ms X, disagrees with the Council’s decision that she does not qualify for a blue badge.

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 Ms X and the Council. This includes the application, assessments and medical evidence. 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 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. Councils can also consider whether a hidden disability causes severe psychological distress when walking or whether walking puts the applicant at serious risk of harm.
7. The guidance promotes the use of mobility assessments rather than relying on medical evidence submitted by the applicant.
8. Ms X applied for a badge under the walking rules. She explained the problems she has with her health and how these issues affect her mobility. Ms X provided some medical evidence.
9. The Council did a phone and in-person assessment. The notes show the assessors considered the information provided by Ms X and the medical evidence. One assessor watched Ms X walk 93 metres at a normal pace without evidence of fatigue, breathlessness or pain; the assessor noted that Ms X walked with an upright posture and with a normal gait and stride. The Council considered if Ms X uses any walking aids and asked about falls. The Council also explored whether there were issues that might mean Ms X would qualify under the hidden disability rules. The Council decided Ms X does not qualify for a badge.
10. Ms X disagrees. She says the Council has not given sufficient weight to her medical evidence and suggests the Council might has breached the Equality Act by relying on a one-off assessment.
11. I will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely I would find fault. We are not an appeal body and can only consider if there is fault in the way the Council made a decision. I have no power to issue a badge and it is not my role to decide if Ms X is eligible for a badge or to re-make the decision.
12. The Council considered all the information provided by Ms X and the findings from the mobility assessments. It cross-referenced this evidence with the blue badge rules and guidance and decided Ms X does not qualify. I have not seen any suggestion of fault in the way the Council reached this conclusion.
13. Ms X is critical of the Council basing the decision on a one-off assessment. But, mobility assessments are encouraged by the guidance and the Council also considered other evidence.
14. Ms X suggests the Council may have breached the Equality Act. However, the Council must assess each application on its own merits and a decision to refuse a badge is not an indication that a council has breached the Equality Act.

Back to top

Final decision

15. 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