Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council decided his disabled parking Blue Badge application. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to warrant us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X has a medical condition which requires close access to a toilet and which causes him distress and anxiety. He applied for a Blue Badge under the non‑visible disability criterion, so he could use disabled parking spaces. Mr X complains the Council:
1. failed to properly apply the Department for Transport’s guidance when refusing his Blue Badge application;
2. was dismissive of his condition and needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

4. I considered information from Mr X, relevant guidance on the Blue Badge scheme, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. 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 was reached after following proper process.
6. Mr X provided the Council with information about his conditions and how it affects his physical and psychological states at the times he would be using the badge when he applied for the Blue Badge. He also had opportunities to submit further evidence at later points in the application process. The Council considered the information Mr X provided. Officers did not dismiss Mr X’s evidence. They recognised and took account of Mr X’s diagnosed conditions and their impacts on him during their assessment of his application. Officers applied the guidance to Mr X’s application. They noted a Blue Badge is not awarded based on the applicant having a particular diagnosed condition. As the badge scheme is designed to help those with significantly reduced mobility, the national guidance expects authorities to focus on this, whether it is caused by physical or mental health conditions. They noted that needing fast toilet access is not in the national Blue Badge guidance criteria and that disabled parking bays are not placed to be close to toilets. Officers determined the information Mr X provided about the mental health impacts on him of his medical condition did not show they more often than not caused him severe or overwhelming psychological distress. They decided none of the issues Mr X raised about his condition and its impacts on him engaged the guidance criteria to give them grounds to issue him with a badge.
7. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process here, including how it applied national Blue Badge guidance, to warrant us investigating. We recognise Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision. But it is not fault for a council to properly make a decision with which someone disagrees.
8. We note the Council’s Blue Badge refusal happened over a year ago. The Council has advised Mr X that applicants can reapply for a badge within six months of a refusal. Mr X may now reapply for a Blue Badge. He should provide to the Council any new information he may have about the physical and mental health impacts of his conditions on his mobility. It would then be for the Council to make a new decision on any further Blue Badge application Mr X submits.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman