Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has failed to renew her blue badge despite her condition not changing. Mrs X says this has caused her distress. We have found fault in the actions of the Council for failing to advise why it could not accept information provided by Mrs X. The Council has apologised for this failing which is a suitable remedy.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council has failed to renew her blue badge despite her condition not changing.
2. Mrs X says this has caused her distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered the information provided by Mrs X and have discussed the complaint with her over the telephone.
6. I have also considered the information provided by the Council.
7. Both Mrs X and the Council were invited to provide comments on my draft decision. Any comments provided have been considered before a final decision was issued.

Back to top

What I found

8. 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.
9. Since August 2019 the guidance has included the introduction of assessment criteria for people with severe mobility problems caused by non-visible (‘hidden’) disabilities.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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 of two 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 a permanent and substantial physical or hidden disability that causes inability to walk or very considerable difficulty in walking.

13. Applicants who can walk more than 80 metres and do not display very considerable difficulty walking for any other reason, including very considerable psychological distress, or serious risk to themselves or others, would not be eligible. If an applicant is unhappy with the outcome of an assessment, they may ask the council to review the decision.

What happened

14. Mrs X applied to renew her Blue Badge under the hidden disability criteria in June 2023. Mrs X also told the Council she suffered from a physical disability which affected her mobility. Mrs X sent evidence from her medical advisor stating her physical condition led to anxiety and panic attacks. Mrs X also included evidence from her GP.
15. The Council assessed Mrs X’s application in late June 2023 and decided it needed further medical information to support Mrs X’s application. The Council asked Mrs X to provide more information on her non-visible disability.
16. Mrs X returned the same documents she had sent with her application in August 2023. The Council again asked Mrs X to provide a non-visible disability evidence form and cover letter. The Council said this should be from an expert involved in the diagnosis and treatment of her anxiety. The non-visible disability evidence form says evidence cannot solely be from a GP.
17. Mrs X returned the same documents in September 2023.
18. Mrs X contacted the Council in early October 2023 and said she did not want the mental health aspect of the application to be considered.
19. The Council assessed Mrs X’s application in line with her request. The Council contacted Mrs X in early October 2023 and said it had declined her application as there was not enough supporting evidence to show she regularly experienced difficulties.
20. Mrs X contacted the Council in mid-October 2023 to say she wanted to appeal the decision as nothing had changed since the last Blue Badge was issued.
21. The Council contacted Mrs X in mid-November 2023 to say to appeal the decision further details of her hidden disability would be needed. The Council gave a list of examples of professionals who could provide the evidence such as a psychiatrist or mental health nurse.
22. Mrs X submitted an appeal in December 2023. The Council reviewed the information provided but did not advise Mrs X why it could not accept the information she had sent in respect of her appeal.
23. Mrs X resubmitted her appeal in April 2024 and again provided the same medical information.
24. The Council responded to Mrs X and told her it could not accept the expert assessor form completed by her GP. The Council again requested Mrs X provide further evidence from an expert involved in her treatment. The Council asked for evidence showing Mrs X regularly experienced difficulties walking and that those difficulties were unmitigated or unmanaged.
25. The Council logged a complaint in June 2024 following contact from the Ombudsman’s office and issued a response in late June 2024.
26. The Council said there was no fault in the assessment of the application but did apologise for not telling Mrs X in December 2023 it could not accept the evidence she had sent. The Council resent an appeal form to Mrs X and told her GP could not complete this.
27. I understand from the Council no further information has been received and the appeal has now been closed. The Council has said Mrs X could make a new application if she chose to.

Analysis

28. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to decide whether someone should have a Blue Badge or not. This is for the Council to decide.
29. However, we do expect Council’s to follow the right procedure when making decisions. This includes proper consideration of medical evidence.
30. There is nothing obviously wrong with the way in which the Council has assessed Mrs X’s medical information. The Council has shown it has assessed the medical evidence provided to it and then decided to request further information.
31. After Mrs X told the Council not to include the mental health aspect of her application, the Council has made a decision based on the information available to it.
32. When Mrs X appealed the decision and provided the same information again I cannot see the Council told Mrs X why the medical evidence submitted could not be accepted. This is fault. However, the Council has already apologised for this and told Mrs X what she would need to provide to appeal. This is a suitable remedy for the fault which occurred.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I have found fault in the actions of the Council for failing to advise why it could not accept information provided by Mrs X.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman