Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that she is not eligible for a blue badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s decision that she is not eligible for a blue badge. She says the Council ignored the information she provided.

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 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 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))
3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X applied for a blue badge. In her application, she listed her reasons for applying, which included:
• Incontinence and needing to park immediately
• Knee and back pain which makes walking difficult.,
• Anxiety and uncontrollable emotions due to her Autism diagnosis
7. Department of Transport guidance sets out what assessors may wish to consider when assessing a person’s mobility. The guidance is non-statutory which means councils do not have to follow it, but most councils do.
8. 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. There are two types of eligibility criteria:
• Eligible without further assessment
• Eligible subject to further assessment
9. For the eligible subject to further assessment criteria, people may be described as:
• a person who drives a vehicle regularly, has a severe disability in both arms and is unable to operate, or has considerable difficulty in operating, all, or some types of parking meter; or
• a person who has been certified* by an expert assessor as having an enduring and substantial disability which causes them, during the course of a journey, to be unable to walk, experience very considerable difficulty whilst walking, which may include very considerable psychological distress
• in addition, they may be at risk of serious harm when walking - or pose, when walking, a risk of serious harm to any other person
10. Miss X was not eligible without further assessment and so the Council assessed her for the second criteria.
11. The Council completed a face-to-face walking assessment. The assessment noted the following:
• Miss X’s reasons for applying and her reported medical conditions.
• Miss X was observed to complete the 80-meter walking assessment at slow pace but she didn’t require any walking equipment or needed to stop.
• Miss X was observed to have a pronounced antalgic gait because of knee pain and was observed stumbling on her leg
• Miss X was observed to have mild-moderate behaviours of discomfort when walking and noted to have pain when transferring from sit to standing.
• Miss X used medication to manage her pain.
• Miss X was not observed to have been breathless nor have any reported history of medical conditions that would cause breathlessness.
12. Following the face-to-face assessment, the Council decided Miss X was not eligible for a blue badge.
13. An investigation is not justified as we are not likely to find fault. This is because the Council properly considered all of Miss X’s information, completed its assessment appropriately, and made its decision in line with guidance. We cannot find fault with the decision itself if there was no fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman