Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s Blue Badge application because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council has told him that he does not meet the qualifying criteria for the Blue Badge scheme. He says his confidence is affected because of having to walk further away from his car when going to places. He disagrees with the Council’s decision.

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))
3. 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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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.
7. Mr X said he disagrees with the Council’s decision not to issue a blude badge. The evidence shows the Council considered his medical condition and his prescribed medication. It decided his application form and the medical evidence he provided did not suggest his walking difficulties were significant enough to issue a blue badge.
8. Mr X appealed, asking the Council to reconsider its original decision and saying that he would provide further evidence from his physiotherapist and GP.
9. The Council considered the information Mr X provided at appeal but maintained its decision to refuse the application. It said that whilst Mr X had pain when walking, it did not meet the statutory threshold for a blue badge.
10. 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 the Council made its decision. The Council assessed Mr X’s application based on the information and evidence he provided and decided he had not provided sufficient evidence to show he currently qualifies for a blue badge. It explained its decision in its appeal outcome letter. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman