Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to refuse her application to renew her blue badge. We discontinued our investigation. That was because events moved on. The Council has a new blue badge application process and awarded Mrs X a blue badge. There was therefore no significant remaining injustice to Mrs X and no worthwhile outcome achievable by further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to refuse her application to renew her blue badge. The Council awarded Mrs X a blue badge previously due to her Epilepsy and she said her condition has not improved.
2. Mrs X said her doctor increased her medication for depression and anxiety following the Council’s decision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation, I considered the complaint and the information Mrs X provided.
6. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
7. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

8. Mrs X applied to renew her blue badge in March 2023, providing supporting evidence.
9. The Council wrote to Mrs X with its decision on 16 March 2023. It said Mrs X’s evidence did not show her disability is severe enough to meet the blue badge criteria under hidden disabilities.
10. Mrs X appealed against the Council’s decision, providing more evidence of her disability.
11. The Council reviewed Mrs X’s application and sent its decision on 27 April 2023. It upheld the original decision and refused to award Mrs X a blue badge. It said Mrs X had not provided enough evidence she experienced significant psychological distress and/or that there is a significant risk of harm to herself or another person when travelling between a vehicle and a destination.
12. Mrs X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in May 2023.

My investigation

13. Mrs X told me the blue badge meant she could park close to a building or shop when she goes out in case she has a seizure. She has a change of clothes (as she sometimes has accidents) and medication in the car. Roads and car parks are a danger, as she can have blackouts and walk without realising where she is. This causes Mrs X anxiety.
14. In response to my investigation, the Council told me it had introduced a new procedure for blue badge applications, which it has been working on over the last year.
15. This work has included officers attending Department for Transport training events and meetings with other councils to benchmark the Council’s approach.
16. The Council introduced the new procedure in August 2023. It includes two new officers in the Council’s blue badge team, a new screening matrix, and referrals to occupational therapists. There is also a new appeals panel.
17. As the new procedure came in after Mrs X’s application, the Council decided its appeal panel would discuss her case as part of the Ombudsman’s investigation. The appeal panel unanimously decided to award Mrs X a blue badge.

Analysis

18. When Mrs X brought her complaint to us, she had completed the Council’s application process and it made a final decision to refuse her application. To resolve her complaint, Mrs X wanted the Council to award her a blue badge.
19. During my investigation, the Council introduced a new blue badge application process. It therefore decided to review Mrs X’s application and it has awarded her a blue badge.
20. The situation has moved on from when Mrs X brought her complaint. She now has the outcome she wanted, and the Council has a new application process which it considers is fairer and more fit for purpose.
21. In light of this new information, I do not consider Mrs X has any significant remaining injustice. Further investigation would not now lead to a different outcome for her.
22. Given the new application procedure and training of staff, I do not consider there is any worthwhile outcome achievable by continuing my investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I discontinued my investigation. That was because events moved on. The Council has a new blue badge application process and awarded Mrs X a blue badge. There was therefore no significant remaining injustice to Mrs X and no worthwhile outcome achievable by further investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman