Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about an application for a Blue Badge because it is unlikely he would find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to give her daughter a Blue Badge.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I read the complaint and information provided by the Council. This includes Mrs X’s Blue Badge application and the findings of the Occupational Therapist. I invited Mrs X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Blue Badge government guidance

5. The guidance says that people who can walk 80 metres and do not demonstrate very considerable difficulty in walking are not eligible for a badge. Councils should take into account factors such as pain, speed, balance, gait and shortness of breath when assessing if someone can walk 80 metres.
6. The government is introducing new rules from 30 August 2019 to make it easier for people with hidden disabilities (for example, autism) to qualify for a Blue Badge. Not everyone with a hidden disability will qualify.

What happened

7. Mrs X has a young daughter who has a neurological condition which causes a range of lifelong difficulties. Mrs X says her daughter can display a lack awareness of danger and can exhibit behavioural problems. For example, she may refuse to walk. Mrs X has a second young child and taking them both out can be challenging.
8. Mrs X applied for a Blue Badge. After an initial assessment, the case was referred to an Occupational Therapist (OT). Mrs X spoke to the OT and described her daughter as being a “good walker” but also said that she can present with behavioural problems and a lack of awareness. The OT noted that the child receives the care part of a benefit called Disability Living Allowance (DLA) but she does not get the mobility part of DLA. The Council decided Mrs X’s daughter does not qualify for a badge.
9. Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decision. She is aware of other children, with the same condition, who have a Blue Badge.

Assessment

10. I will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely I would find fault. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body and can only consider if there is fault in the way the Council has made a decision.
11. The Council assessed the application but decided not to award a badge because there is nothing to suggest Mrs X’s daughter has very considerable physical difficulties with walking and cannot walk 80 metres. Under the current rules her daughter’s need for close supervision is not a qualifying condition for a badge. There is nothing to suggest fault in the way the Council assessed the application.
12. I cannot comment on why other children have been issued with a badge. There might be other issues that Mrs X is unaware of. I can only consider the way the Council assessed Mrs X’s application.
13. Mrs X could reapply after the new rules have come into force. I do not know if Mrs X’s child would qualify under the new rules. It would be for the Council, not the Ombudsman, to assess an application made under the new rules.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman