Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful blue badge application. 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 that he does not qualify for a blue badge. He wants a badge because it would make him more independent.

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 the Council’s assessment. 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. People with a non-physical disability (sometimes called a hidden disability) might qualify if they demonstrate considerable psychological distress when walking or there is a risk of harm to themselves or others while walking.
6. The blue badge guidance says councils must be satisfied that a person’s difficulties cannot be managed through reasonable coping strategies.
7. Mr X applied for a badge and submitted medical evidence relating to hidden disabilities. The Council completed an assessment. The assessment notes show the Council considered Mr X’s application, medical evidence, appeal and the guidance. The Council cross-referenced the evidence with the qualifying criteria and agreed Mr X experiences a degree of difficulty when travelling. But, it decided the evidence does not show his difficulties are to the extent that he qualifies for a badge under the hidden disability rules. The Council noted Mr X reported that he is usually accompanied when he goes out and he has a range of coping strategies in place. Mr X explained problems he has whilst driving and the Council correctly explained that such problems are not qualifying conditions for a badge.
8. Mr X says he may not always have a partner. But, the Council can only assess an application based on the circumstances that exist at the time of the application. If Mr X becomes single, he could re-apply based on his new situation. Mr X says he wants to be independent and not reliant on his partner. However, not all his coping strategies involve another person and, based on the guidance, the Council is correct to take all the coping mechanisms into account.

Back to top

Final decision

9. 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