Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s consideration of his son’s blue badge application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a blue badge for his then 3 year old son, Y. Mr X says the Council did not properly assess the application under the hidden disability criteria. He says Y has Autism, and is currently awaiting a formal autism assessment. He has major delays in understanding and emotional regulation; little awareness of danger and often falls or sits in the road which is unsafe and difficult to manage.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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))
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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. 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. Since August 2019, the guidance has included assessment criteria for people with severe mobility problems caused by non-visible (‘hidden’) disabilities. 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.
7. 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.

8. Mr X applied for a blue badge for his son, Y, under the hidden disability criteria. He provided evidence in support of his application including Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan.
9. The Council told Mr X it would not consider the application further and closed it as “not processed”. It said the evidence he provided did not indicate Y meets the DfT eligibility criteria for issuing of a blue badge under the hidden disability criteria.
10. Mr X appealed the Council’s decision. The Council explained it could not accept the appeal because the application had not been processed. However, it considered the evidence Mr X provided and explained why it did not show Y meets the eligible subject to further assessment criteria. It provided Mr X with more information on the type of evidence it needs and would accept should a fresh application be made.
11. In response to our initial enquiries to the Council, it said Mr X has submitted a fresh blue badge application which it is currently considering at appeal stage.
12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council here to warrant an investigation. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at the Council’s decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes it 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 Mr X disagrees with it.
13. In making its decision, the Council considered the information and evidence Mr X provided, took account of the relevant DfT guidance and clearly explained its decision not to progress the application further. There is no sign of fault in how it took the decision and we therefore cannot question whether it was right or wrong.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman