Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Miss 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. Miss X complains that her Blue Badge assessment and appeal did not follow Department for Transport guidance. Her condition is fluctuating and not visible, yet the assessor relied only on a brief visual check. She says the council failed to consider the effects of her prescribed medication. It claimed no medical evidence was provided, despite her diagnosis and clinical documents being submitted.

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. Miss X said the Council did not consider her medical conditions when she applied for a Blue Badge. The evidence shows the Council did consider her medical condition and her prescribed medication. It said she was able to walk 80–100 metres on different surfaces with pain and discomfort. However, it decided her application form and the medical evidence she provided did not suggest her walking difficulties were significant enough to issue a blue badge.
8. Miss X appealed, saying she forced herself to walk on the day of the assessment and was willing to provide further evidence from her GP. However, between her appeal and the Council’s final response, Miss X did not provide any additional medical evidence.
9. The Council considered the information Miss X provided at appeal but maintained its decision to refuse the application. It said Miss X had not provided sufficient evidence to show she meets the criteria 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 Miss X’s application based on the information and evidence she provided and decided she had not provided sufficient evidence to show she currently qualifies for a blue badge. It explained its decision in its appeal outcome letter. We will not investigate Miss 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 Miss 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