Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the process of issuing a blue badge because there is not significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X is complaining the Council wrongfully rejected and delayed the approval of his blue badge application. He says this caused him undue distress and would like an apology from the Council.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant including references to information by the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X applied for a blue badge for his child who has a medical condition. This statement does not give more details to protect the family’s anonymity. The Council initially rejected the application as it was unsatisfied the medical condition met the required guidelines. Mr X appealed this decision and gave more supporting evidence, but this was rejected. At stage one of the complaint process the Council again refused a blue badge.
6. At stage two, the Council reconsidered all the evidence and issued Mr X a blue badge. It apologised for any distress caused by its lack of explanation of the previous refusals.
7. I understand it was difficult for Mr X to have his application rejected at various stages with an insufficient explanation. However, that in itself is not a significant enough injustice to warrant the Ombudsman devoting time and public money to investigating the complaint. Mr X is left with some uncertainty about whether the Council might have issued the blue badge significantly sooner. However, that is not necessarily straightforward. Mr X did not pursue the matter for several months and then provided some additional information. This uncertainty is not significant enough to warrant investigation.
8. The key point is that Mr X wanted a blue badge and he now has one. In the circumstances, it would be disproportionate to devote resources to investigating the process that led to getting the blue badge.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. The Council has issued the blue badge and apologised for any lack of explanation. Any remaining injustice is not significant enough to warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman