Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for a blue badge. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for renewal of her blue badge. Mrs X says the Council failed to consider a letter from her GP and did not assess her application properly.

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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Department for Transport’s (DfT) Blue Badge Scheme helps people with severe physical mobility problems, or other conditions affecting their mobility, to access goods and services. The guidance says councils must make sure they only issue badges to residents who satisfy one or more of the criteria set out in legislation.
6. There are two types of eligibility criteria:

• where a person is eligible without further assessment, they will receive a Blue Badge.
• where a person is eligible subject to further assessment, they must fulfil one or more of three criteria to qualify for a badge. They must:
• drive a vehicle regularly, have a severe disability in both arms and be unable to operate, or have considerable difficulty operating all or some types of parking meter; or
• have been certified by an expert assessor as having an enduring or substantial disability, which causes them, during the course of a journey, to be unable to walk or experience very considerable difficulty walking, which may include very considerable psychological distress; or
• be at risk of serious harm when walking or pose a serious risk of harm to any other person.

7. Mrs X applied to the Council for renewal of her blue badge. The Council refused the application at decision and appeal stage.
8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s consideration of her application. It considered the information Mrs X provided at application, in person assessment and appeal stage and assessed her application against the relevant DfT guidance. It noted:
• the medical information provided by Mrs X.
• at the walking assessment Mrs X walked more than 80 metres, displayed mild difficulties with her mobility and was seen to have behaviours of discomfort and/or breathlessness when walking.
• Mrs X advised she has applied to renew her Blue Badge as she cannot walk because of poor balance issues and waiting for knee replacement. She also confirmed her GP is managing her conditions.
9. The assessment, information, and evidence submitted does not meet the mobility criteria.
10. I note Mrs X complains the Council has not considered the letter of support from her GP. However, the medical information included in the letter was already considered by the Council.
11. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at the Council’s decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decision. If, as here, we consider there was no fault in the way the decision was made we cannot question it.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered her application to renew her Blue Badge.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman