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

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision she is not eligible for a blue badge renewal.

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 effect 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 the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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))
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. 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.
8. 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 have to 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.

9. Mrs X applied to the Council for a renewal of her blue badge. The Council refused Mrs X’s application.
10. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision. It considered the information and evidence Mrs X provided and completed a face to face assessment via an expert assessor. The assessor concluded Mrs X did not meet the mobility eligibility criteria for issuing of a blue badge. The Council maintained its decision to refuse the application.
11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council here. It assessed and decided Mrs X’s application against the eligibility criteria set out in the guidance and considered the information and evidence Mrs X provided.
12. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not look again at the Council’s decision to decide whether it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes it followed to make its decision. In making its decision, the Council took account of the relevant guidance, the expert assessor’s assessment and the information and evidence Mrs X provided in support of her application. It followed the appropriate process in making its decision and so we cannot question it even though Mrs X disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman