Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X's Blue Badge application because there is not enough evidence of fault. We will not investigate Mr X's concerns about Freedom of Information requests because these are matters the Information Commissioner's Office is better placed to consider.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council initially assessed his Blue Badge application under the wrong eligibility criteria. He says that after the Council overturned its refusal, it failed to provide clear information about how he could pay the issue fee and obtain his Blue Badge. He also raises concerns about the Council's complaint handling and handling of Freedom of Information requests.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome (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)
4. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. 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.
8. The evidence shows the Council initially considered Mr X’s application under the non-visible disability criteria and decided he did not meet the threshold.
9. However, following a review of the evidence, the Council identified Mr X would be eligible under the walking difficulties criteria and overturned its earlier decision, approving the application and progressing it for issue. In November 2025, the Council also wrote to Mr X explaining that a £10 issue fee was payable and providing information about how payment could be made.
10. Mr X wants the Council to make service improvements so that applicants are assessed against all eligibility categories, regardless of the category they identify in their application. However, the Council is not obliged to do this. Councils are entitled to assess applications based on the information and evidence provided by the applicant, including the category under which the applicant chooses to apply.
11. We will not find fault where a council has followed its published process and considered an application on that basis.
12. We are not an appeal body. Our role is to consider whether there was fault in how the Council made its decision and whether this caused an injustice. While the Council may not have initially assessed the application under the most appropriate category, it has since reconsidered the case and provided the outcome Mr X sought and gave Mr X instructions on how to make the payment. We will not investigate this complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.
13. Mr X also complains about the Council's handling of Freedom of Information requests. However, concerns about a council's compliance with Freedom of Information legislation are generally matters for the Information Commissioner's Office to consider.
14. It is not a proportionate use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman