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

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council refused to renew her Blue Badge after three years. She says she cannot walk without a rollator (a wheeled walking aid) and needs a wide parking space to get it in and out of the car. She must open the car door fully because she cannot lift the rollator into the boot. She also cannot keep her head up without a brace, which affects her balance. She says the rollator is essential for her mobility.

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. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether the complainant disagrees with the decision the Council made.
8. The Council considered Mrs X’s information about relying on a rollator, reviewed her evidence, arranged an independent mobility assessment, used a structured tool to record findings, and offered her a review route.
9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault. The Council has followed the processes in line with guidance and the scoring mechanism. It also considered Mrs X’s medical needs, scored them in line with its assessment criteria and decided she did not meet the threshold for a Blue Badge.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman