Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse a blue badge to Miss Y’s child. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains against the Council’s decision not to issue her Child X with a blue badge. Miss Y says this means X cannot go out due to distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
3. 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

4. I considered information provided by Miss Y and the Council.
5. I considered 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 only to issue badges to residents who satisfy one or more of the criteria set out in legislation.
7. Miss Y applied to the Council for a Blue Badge for her child, X. She said that X has a long-term and substantial disability which causes them to experience significant psychological distress when walking or on a journey.
8. Miss Y provided medical evidence from X’s hospital consultant and a specialist organisation for X’s condition. The medical evidence did not address X having overwhelming psychological distress when on a journey or walking.
9. The Council considered the application under the Department for Transport’s (DfT) guidance for blue badges. The Council refused the blue badge application for X.
10. Mrs Y asked for a review of the Council’s decision. The Council said it could only review the decision if Miss Y provided further medical evidence to show X meets the criteria for a blue badge. Miss Y refused to provide more medical evidence and wanted the Council to do a review on the evidence already provided. The Council upheld its decision to refuse the application as the criteria for issuing of a blue badge was not met.
11. 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 whether there was fault in how the Council made its decision.
12. When making its decision, the Council considered the medical and specialist organisation’s evidence Miss Y provided and applied the DfT guidance. It found the evidence not to be enough to meet the criteria because it has confirmed the child’s disability, symptoms and medication but does not show how they meet the DfT guidance for blue badges, in particular how journeys would cause X overwhelming distress.
13. As the Council considered the application against relevant criteria before forming its view, there is not enough evidence of fault in the decision-making process to justify investigating. Therefore, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss Y’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