Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how long the Council took to review a blue badge eligibility decision. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Ms B complains the Council delayed providing her son, Mr Y, with a blue badge so he could access the community and go to work. Ms B says the Council did not properly consider the information she provided when she applied to renew her son’s blue badge. She says the Council based its decision on outdated social care information and did not ask for other evidence from the professionals involved with her son. Ms B says her son could not continue to work as he could not plan where he would park without the blue badge. She says the situation impacted adversely on Mr Y’s mental health. Ms B wants the Council to issue her son with a blue badge.

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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(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 the complainant 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. Ms B reapplied for her son’s, Mr Y, blue badge in August 2025. The Council provided an eligibility decision the same month and said Mr Y was not eligible for a blue badge. It said it had completed an assessment under eligible further assessment criteria but there was not enough evidence to show how Mr Y’s hidden difficulties impacted on his mobility in terms of risk, severity or frequency of walking difficulties. The Council said Ms B could ask for a review.
7. Ms B submitted a review request in August. The Council sent the review request to its occupational therapy (OT) team. It confirmed it would take approximately four months to complete a review.
8. Ms B complained to the Council about the wait time for a review explaining how this would impact on Mr Y. She asked if the Council could provide a temporary blue badge as an interim measure.
9. The Council responded to the complaint and said its current wait time was four months and it hoped to complete the review request in December. It said it was working hard to reduce waiting times and recently had a full-time OT in place to help reduce the wait time. It said it followed the DfT guidance to determine eligibility when the evidence provided was insufficient. It acknowledged Mr Y presented with an enduring and substantial disability under the Equality Act 2010 and said it was the impact of his disability on his walking journey it needed to examine. It explained why it could not offer a temporary blue badge and asked
   Ms B to provide any further evidence or information she wanted it to consider.
10. The Council provided a stage 2 complaint response to Ms B’s Member of Parliament. It confirmed the review would happen before 25 December. It said it followed the DfT guidance and ensured its officers received training in disability awareness such as reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010.
11. Ms B confirmed the Council issued her son’s blue badge in January 2026.
12. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. 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. There is no statutory timeline for a blue badge renewal set out in legislation or the DfT guidance. GOV.UK website states decisions will usually made within 12 weeks and this is the same on the Council’s website.
13. The Council uses an expert assessor where it cannot make an eligibility decision on the initial evidence provided with a blue badge application. In Mr Y’s case it appears to have made its decision to award a blue badge in around 16 weeks. There Is not enough evidence to show the injustice Ms B claims is because of fault by the Council. Therefore, it is unlikely we could achieve more.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman