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 the Council decided she did not meet the eligibility requirements, despite her reported difficulties with day‑to‑day activities. She says this means she now works from home most of the time as she cannot use public transport.

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 Blue Badge Scheme aims to support people whose ability to make journeys on foot is limited by an enduring and substantial disability. Councils must only issue Blue Badges where applicants meet the eligibility criteria set out in legislation and statutory guidance.
7. Miss X complained the Council did not properly consider how her medical condition affects her mobility when it refused her Blue Badge application. The evidence shows the Council assessed her application under the correct “subject to further assessment” criteria. It considered the medical evidence she provided, including specialist reports, and carried out a mobility assessment.
8. The assessment found Miss X could walk more than 80 metres, without walking aids, and recorded only mild difficulty with mobility. Although the Council acknowledged Miss X’s diagnosis and her reported symptoms, including dizziness, fatigue and balance difficulties, it decided the evidence did not show she experiences very considerable difficulty whilst walking or otherwise meets the eligibility threshold for a Blue Badge.
9. Miss X appealed the decision and expanded on the impact of her condition. The appeal decision confirms she did not submit additional medical evidence demonstrating a significant change in circumstances or a greater level of mobility impairment. The Council reviewed the information again and upheld its original decision.
10. We are not an appeal body and cannot decide whether Miss X should have been awarded a Blue Badge. Our role is to consider whether there was fault in how the Council reached its decision. The Council followed the correct process, considered relevant evidence, applied the appropriate criteria, and explained its reasons for refusal.
11. We will not investigate this complaint. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. 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