Summary: Mrs X complained the Council wrongly refused her Blue Badge renewal application for her child, Y, who has a hidden disability. She says this puts them at risk of harm and has caused her and her child distress. The Council is at fault. It has accepted it may not have considered all relevant information and told us it wishes to invite Mrs X to make a fresh application. This is an appropriate action to remedy the injustice caused. The Council will now make this offer to Mrs X and review its procedures.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council wrongly refused her Blue Badge renewal application for her child, Y, who has a hidden disability. She says this puts them at risk of harm and has caused her and her child distress. She wants the Council to re-consider the application and award her child 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I read Mrs X’s complaint and spoke with her about it on the phone.
5. I made enquiries of the Council and considered information it sent me.
6. Mrs X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Blue Badge Scheme

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. It does this by allowing them, or their carer, to park near their destination. The scheme gives parking concessions to Blue Badge holders. Councils are responsible for the day-to-day administration and enforcement of the scheme. This includes assessing applicants’ eligibility for the badge.
8. Since August 2019 the guidance has included the introduction of assessment criteria for people with severe mobility problems caused by non-visible (‘hidden’) disabilities.
9. The DfT guidance sets out what assessors may wish to consider when assessing a person’s mobility. The guidance is non-statutory. This means councils do not have to follow it, but most councils do. We expect councils to explain if they decide not to follow such guidance.
10. Councils may issue a badge to persons who are more than three years old and who satisfy one or more of the eligibility criteria set out in legislation.
11. There are two types of eligibility criteria:
• where a person is eligible without further assessment, they will receive a Blue Badge;
• where a person is eligible subject to further assessment, they have to fulfil one of more of the following criteria to qualify for a badge. They must either:
1. drive a vehicle regularly, have a severe disability in both arms and be unable to operate, or have considerable difficulty operating, all or some types of parking meter; or
2. have a permanent and substantial physical or hidden disability that causes inability to walk or very considerable difficulty in walking, which may include very considerable psychological distress; or
3. be at risk of serious harm when walking, or pose, when walking, a risk of serious harm to another person.
12. The guidance says that any of the above difficulties could potentially be caused by a physical, or by a non-visible (hidden) disability.
13. It is considered good practice for Blue Badge application processes to allow applicants to provide any relevant supporting evidence such as: diagnosis letters, care plans, patient summaries, education, health and care (EHC) plans or disability benefits.
14. If an applicant is unhappy with the outcome of an assessment, they may ask the council to review the decision.
15. Unsuccessful applicants should be given detailed feedback and a clear explanation of the reason for refusal in the decision letter(s). This ensures applicants feel their application has been given due consideration and makes the decision-making process transparent.

What happened

16. Mrs X’s child, Y, has health conditions and a hidden disability. In summer 2022, Y held a Blue Badge previously issued by the Council, which was due to expire. In August 2022, Mrs X applied to the Council to renew Y’s Blue Badge.
17. The Council considered her application but decided, based on the information available, that Y did not meet the criteria. It wrote to her and told her of its decision. The letter sent was a standard template with parts for officers to delete where not applicable. Some text meant for deletion remained in the letter, for example, the sentence “[support staff to select one or more of the following as appropriate]”. It did not include any detailed feedback on why it had refused the application. It said if she was dissatisfied, she could ask the Council to re-consider its decision.
18. Mrs X asked for a review of the decision, setting out her reasons why she felt Y met the criteria. She said she had lots of supporting documents evidencing Y’s needs, but was unable to upload them all as the system would only allow her to attach three documents.
19. The Council completed the review but did not change its decision. It wrote to Mrs X. The letter sent was of a similar nature to the decision letter. It again contained the text “[support staff to select one or more of the following as appropriate]” and did not give detailed feedback about the reason for refusal.
20. It signposted Mrs X to the Ombudsman if she was not happy with the decision.
21. Mrs X remained unhappy and brought the complaint to us.
22. In its response to our enquiries, the Council said:
• It acknowledged that Mrs X had told it in her review request that she had more evidence to provide, but was unable to upload it due to the system limit of three documents. It had not contacted Mrs X to discuss this or provide an alternative method for Mrs X to upload these documents for consideration during the review. Because of this, it accepted it may not have considered all the relevant information when reaching its decision that Y was not eligible for a Blue Badge.
• It said it invited Mrs X to re-apply and would provide an email contact for her, in case she experienced difficulty uploading documents.
• Officers involved in the processing of Blue Badge applications for children’s services were currently undertaking a review of procedures.

Analysis

23. In its enquiry response to us, the Council acknowledged that it did not contact Mrs X about the additional information she referred to in her review request that she was unable to upload. It accepted it might have not considered all relevant information. This is out of line with the Blue Badge scheme guidance and is fault.
24. The decision letters sent to Mrs X after the original decision and the review did not provide detailed feedback about why the Council had refused the application. The letters contained sentences intended to be deleted by the officers before sending and generic decision reasons which did not make it clear for Mrs X why her child who had previously been issued a Blue Badge no longer met the criteria. This is poor administrative practice and is fault. This caused Mrs X uncertainty about whether the Council had properly considered her application and how it had reached its decision.
25. In its enquiry response to us, the Council has invited Mrs X to re-apply for a Blue Badge in a fresh application and offered support to ensure she can provide the Council with any relevant supporting evidence. This is an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused. The Council should now make this offer to Mrs X.
26. The Council has told us that officers involved in Blue Badge applications for children’s services are currently reviewing their procedures. This is an appropriate action and the Council should ensure this review includes measures to prevent recurrence of the faults identified during this investigation.

Back to top

Agreed action

27. Within one month of the final decision, the Council will write to Mrs X to invite her to re-apply for a Blue Badge for Y. It will provide her with the details of the relevant officer to contact should she have any difficulty uploading her documents. The case should be considered by officers not involved in her previous application.
28. Within three months of the final decision, the Council will provide us with evidence of its procedural review related to Blue Badge applications for children. This should include a review of:
• the format and content of decision letters sent to unsuccessful applicants to ensure they give detailed feedback and comply with the Blue Badge Scheme guidance.
• how the Council allows applicants to provide supporting documents, to ensure the Council’s system and procedures enables applicants to upload all relevant documents for consideration and signposts them to the relevant team should they require further support with this.
29. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault and the Council has agreed action to remedy the injustice caused and improve its services.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman