Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to remove the one-hour free car parking for Blue Badge holders from the Council car parks without prior consultation and an appropriate equality impact assessment. There was fault in the way the Council made its decision to remove the free one-hour car parking. The Council also failed to address Mrs X’s concerns properly. The Council’s faults caused Mrs X avoidable uncertainty and frustration. The Council will apologise to Mrs X to acknowledge the avoidable uncertainty and frustration caused. It will also review its equality impact assessment and take steps to prevent recurrence of the fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to remove the one-hour free car parking for blue badge holders from the Council car parks without prior consultation and an appropriate equality impact assessment. She also complained that the Council failed to address her concerns properly.
2. Mrs X said the Council’s decision impacted her and other disabled people, who regularly used the free one-hour car parking concession.

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 recommend 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. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
6. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I spoke to Mrs X about her complaint.
8. I considered evidence provided by the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

10. Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 establishes the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED). The PSED requires public bodies to have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations when carrying out public functions such as proposing a new policy or revising an existing policy.
11. An equality impact assessment (EIA) is a tool to help public bodies to ensure their policies and decision-making processes are fair and do not present needless barriers or disadvantage any protected groups such as disabled people. When an equality impact assessment is required, it must be carried out before a decision is made and implemented.
12. Our Principles of Good Administrative Practice guidance sets out the standards we expect to see from councils to ensure it makes decisions which are sound, fair and transparent.

What happened

13. This section sets out the key events of this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
14. Mrs X is a blue badge holder (a scheme that helps disabled people park closer to their destination) who previously accessed the Council’s one-hour free car parking.
15. Mrs X became aware that the Council had ended its free one hour parking scheme for blue badge holders in May 2025 when she parked at a Council car park. Mrs X complained to the Council soon after. She complained she was unaware of the removal. She said the Council’s 2025 budget report and the equality impact assessment did not reference the removal of the free hour. She said the Council’s decision would potentially impact other blue badge holders as well. Mrs X asked the Council to explain how the decision to remove the free hour was made.
16. In late June 2025 the Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint at stage one of its complaints process. The Council said:

• Changes went through the council members and a consultation process following that; no objections were received.
• It had introduced the additional free hour car parking in place of its previous offer of a hugely discounted parking permit. The Council had received complaints about the additional hour. So it set out a proposal to remove this and put a permit back in place but at an increased cost. It did this in 2024. The Council said the window to appeal its decision had closed now, and it had advertised the change on the Council website, in all car parks where the Order outlining the change applied and in the local press.

17. Mrs X escalated her complaint seeking clarification on when and how the decision to remove the free hour was made.
18. In July 2025 the Council issued a stage two complaint response. In it, the Council:

• Explained the change was made as part of the budget setting process at the Full Council in late February 2024. It shared weblinks to the documents of this meeting with Mrs X.
• Said the report referenced the introduction of a new blue badge parking permit with budget to administer that scheme. The Council’s monitoring officer was present at the Full Council meeting when the decision was made by council members.
• Said it had completed an equality impact assessment for the budget process as a whole, and the assessment also detailed the consultation that took place.

19. The Council’s equality impact assessment identified no overall significant negative impact. The section on disability in the Council’s equality impact assessment referred to positive impacts from non-parking related matters. It made no reference to the removal of the one hour of free parking.
20. Evidence showed that the Council consulted with the public and business on its website about the budget proposals between December 2023 to early February 2024. The budget questions posed to the public focussed on the main areas of housing, council tax and open spaces.
21. In October 2025 Mrs X complained to us.
22. In response to our enquiries the Council said:

• the decision to remove the free hour was made in February 2024 as part of the fees and charges process, voted by the councillors at the Full Council meeting in 2024. The Council said it introduced a blue badge parking permit which was implemented from April 2024 and the removal of the free hour was delayed until April 2025.
• changes to its Off Street Parking Places Order was advertised outside of the 2024 Full Council meeting. It said it advertised the change on its website, in the local press and also wrote to various other statutory bodies. It said anyone who wished to raise an objection had 28 days to do and it had not received any objections to the removal of the free hour. The Council sent us a Word document of the notice of the Order. It said it had advertised this notice in late March 2024. The Order mentioned the introduction of the permit for blue badge holders. It also mentioned variation, increase and addition of new charging periods and charges. The notice also said the Order could be viewed on the Council’s website and would come into force on 1 April 2024. It also said that any persons wishing to question the validity of the Order of any of its provisions had six weeks from the date of the order to apply to the High Court.
• there was no specific mention of removing the free hour, nor a separate equality impact assessment because the Council was not removing parking, it was offering a different scheme to allow blue badge holders to purchase a parking permit at a discounted rate.
• it had not received any other complaint about the same matter.

Findings

23. It is not our role to decide whether the Council should have kept or removed the one-hour free car parking scheme for blue badge holders. We also cannot ask the Council to restore the free hour. That is the Council’s decision to make. Our role is to look at the processes by which the Council makes its decisions. We cannot criticise the Council’s decision if it made that decision properly.
24. The Council said it did not remove the parking, it offered a different scheme (parking permit for blue badge holders) and therefore there was no specific mention of removing the free hour or a separate equality impact assessment. Its decision to introduce the blue badge parking permit scheme replaced its previous decision to offer a free one-hour parking concession to blue badge holders. These are two separate decisions with their own distinct impact. Therefore, we would expect to see specific consideration of the decision to remove the free hour and an assessment of the impact of that decision on disabled people accessing that scheme as part of an equality impact assessment.
25. The Council said it made the decision to remove the free hour in the February 2024 Full Council meeting. However, documents of this meeting showed no reference or discussion of the removal of the free hour and any impact of that removal on disabled people. This was fault. The Council failed to evidence its consideration of the removal of the free hour car parking concession for blue badge holders, and any impact from this removal on disabled people in the equality impact assessment it carried out which leaves Mrs X uncertain about the decision reached.
26. The Council said it advertised the changes to the parking scheme on its website and the local press in 2024 and received no objections to the removal of the free hour. The Council has provided us with a copy of the notice of making the Order. This makes no specific mention of the removal of one-hour free parking and the Council has not provided evidence of where this was advertised. The Council failed to carry out a proper consultation regarding its decision to remove the free one-hour car parking for disabled blue badge holders. This was fault which adds to Mrs X’s uncertainty about the decision made.
27. The Council’s complaint responses focussed on the introduction of the new blue badge permit when Mrs X’s complaint was about the removal of the free hour parking concession, and how the decision to remove this was made. This was fault which added to Mrs X’s uncertainty and frustration.

Back to top

Action

28. Within one month of this decision the Council will apologise to Mrs X for the avoidable uncertainty and frustration caused by the way it made its decision to remove the free one-hour car parking for blue badge holders. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council will consider this guidance in making the apology.
29. Within three months of this decision the Council will:
• carry out a separate equality impact assessment of its decision to remove the one-hour free parking and replace with a new blue badge parking permit. It will share the outcome of this equality impact assessment with us.
• carry out a review of its decision-making process in relation to the decision to remove the one-hour free parking for blue badge holders. As part of the review it will identify areas of improvement and actions required to ensure future decisions are made properly and in line with the Council’s equality duty.
30. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

31. I found fault causing injustice and the Council agreed actions to remedy that injustice and prevent potential injustice to others in the future.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman