Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of eligibility for a Blue Badge. This is mainly because the Council has agreed to complete a new assessment. We consider this to be a suitable resolution.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council mishandled her application for a Blue Badge because it:
• applied the wrong eligibility criteria;
• did not properly consider evidence from her GP;
• inappropriately commented on her medical treatment; and
• refused to issue a Blue Badge even though in a previous year it assessed her as being eligible for one.
2. Mrs X says not having a Blue Badge has had a significant impact on her independence and daily life as she has had to limit or avoid travel.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and s34H(1), as amended)
5. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide any remaining injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. If we were to investigate it is likely we would find the Council at fault because:
• The evidence does not show the Council assessed the impact of the physical symptoms of Mrs X’s medical condition on her walking ability. This was despite Mrs X and her GP providing information and evidence to the Council about her physical symptoms.
• The Council’s assessment does not show it considered the effectiveness of Mrs X having a family member with her on her walking ability or what would happen if a family member is not with her.
9. Although Mrs X is upset by the Council’s comments about her medical treatment, this is not the basis on which the Council decided she was not eligible for a Blue Badge. Any injustice caused to Mrs X by the Council’s comments is not significant enough to warrant investigation.
10. Although Mrs X says she is confused by the Council’s previous decision that she was eligible for a Blue Badge, she had the benefit of that Blue Badge until it expired. Any injustice arising from a discrepancy in the Council’s decisions is therefore not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Agreed action

11. To its credit the Council agreed to resolve the part of Mrs X’s complaint relating to how it assessed her eligibility for a Blue Badge. To put things right it will complete a re-assessment of Mrs X’s eligibility for a Blue Badge within one month of today.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We have upheld part of Mrs X’s complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve it early by providing a proportionate remedy. Any remaining injustice is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman