Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue his son with a Blue Badge. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council for us to be able to question its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complained about the Council’s decision not to issue his son (Y) with a Blue Badge.

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. (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 and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

The Blue Badge Scheme

5. 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.
6. Since August 2019 the DfT’s guidance has included the introduction of assessment criteria for people with severe mobility problems caused by non-visible (‘hidden’) disabilities.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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 two criteria to qualify for a badge. They must:
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.
10. Applicants who can walk more than 80 metres and do not display very considerable difficulty walking for any other reason, including very considerable psychological distress, or serious risk to themselves or others, would not be eligible. If an applicant is unhappy with the outcome of an assessment, they may ask the council to review the decision.

Mr X’s case

11. Mr X applied to the Council to renew Y’s Blue Badge. The Council rejected Mr X’s application. It said Mr X’s application did not meet the required criteria.
12. Mr X disagreed with the decision and used his right of appeal. Mr X explained Y suffers from multiple allergies which can lead to anaphylactic shock – including a type which has no visible signs. It was important to carry life saving drugs in their car and these needed to be easily accessible. Y struggles to walk when he suffers a reaction, so their car needs to be close. Y also has a special diet, and their car has been adapted to carry and prepare food. Mr X explained Y suffers from chronic asthma and pain in his limbs. Mr X sent information from medical professionals in support of his appeal.
13. The Council considered Mr X’s appeal and the supporting information he sent. It accepted the difficulties faced by Y but decided he did not qualify for a Blue Badge. The Council refused Mr X’s appeal.

Analysis

14. Mr X believes the Council is at fault. He contends the evidence he provided shows that his son is eligible for a Blue Badge. Mr X wants the Council to change its decision.
15. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether somebody disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
16. I have considered the steps the organisation took to consider Mr X’s case and the information it took account when deciding to refuse the Blue Badge. In making its decision, the Council considered the relevant legislation, information from Mr X, and guidance from the Department for Transport. The reasons for the Council's decision are properly set out in the appeal decision letter.
17. Based on the information available there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council considered Mr X’s application and appeal. That being the case, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision or intervene to substitute an alternative view. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman