Summary: The Council was at fault for the way it decided Mrs X’s application and appeal for a Blue Badge for her disabled child. This caused Mrs X injustice. The Council has agreed to make a fresh decision.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained that the Council did not properly consider her disabled child’s individual circumstances when it decided not to renew their blue badge.
2. Mrs X said she has been unable to take more trips with her child to activities or shops because of the dangers of parking further away from entrances. She said it also made it harder for her child to go to their regular and frequent hospital visits.

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, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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(1), as amended)
6. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered the information and documents provided by Mrs X and the Council. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on an earlier draft of this statement. I considered all comments received before I reached a final decision.
8. I considered the relevant legislation and statutory guidance, set out below. I also considered the Ombudsman’s published guidance on remedies.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

9. 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.
10. Since August 2019 the guidance has included the introduction of assessment criteria for people with severe mobility problems caused by non-visible (‘hidden’) disabilities.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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 or more of three criteria to qualify for a badge. They must:
• 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
• have been certified by an expert assessor as having an enduring or substantial disability, which causes them, during the course of a journey, to be unable to walk or experience very considerable difficulty walking, which may include very considerable psychological distress; or
• be at risk of serious harm when walking, or pose a serious risk of harm to any other person.

14. If an applicant is unhappy with the outcome of an assessment, they may ask the council to review the decision.

What happened

15. Mrs X’s child, B, is autistic and has physical health conditions. In 2025, Mrs X applied to renew her child’s Blue Badge. The Council refused the application.
16. Mrs X appealed. She provided a supporting letter from the family support worker. The Council refused the appeal.
17. Mrs X appealed for a second time. The Council got an assessment from an independent assessor. This said Mrs X’s child was not eligible. The Council refused Mrs X’s second appeal.

Analysis

18. In its refusal letters, the Council did not initially comment on the evidence Mrs X provided. The Council did not explain how it made its decisions. This is fault.
19. At the second appeal, the Council got an assessment from an independent assessor. I find this assessment was inaccurate in several ways:
• It referred to an education, health and care (EHC) plan dated February 2024. However, the EHC plan Mrs X supplied with her application is dated March 2024;
• The assessment did not mention B’s specialist healthcare professional intervention, which they receive regularly and frequently, and the assessment form specifically asked about this; and,
• The form asked about speech and language therapy (SALT) and occupational therapy (OT) intervention. The assessment said there is neither. However, B’s EHC plan said there is both SALT and OT intervention.
20. I therefore find the assessment is flawed.
21. The Council appears to have based its final decision solely on the independent assessment. We expect councils to make their own decisions and not rely solely on assessments by other professionals.
22. For these reasons, I cannot find the Council made its decision without fault. I therefore find fault.
23. I find this fault caused Mrs X injustice because it caused uncertainty.

Back to top

Action

24. Within four weeks of this decision, the Council has agreed to make a fresh decision on Mrs X’s application, giving her fresh appeal rights. When telling Mrs X of its decision, the Council should explain how it considered Mrs X’s evidence and explain the reasons for its decision.
25. Further, if the Council asks for an independent assessment, the assessment should take into account all of the evidence provided, including the information in B’s EHC plan.
26. In reaching this recommendation, I have taken into account our published guidance on remedies.
27. The Council will need to provide us with evidence it has completed the above action.

Back to top

Decision

28. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman