The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to renew the complainant’s Blue Badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to renew her Blue Badge.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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)) We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes Ms X’s Blue Badge application, the mobility assessment and a letter from her consultant. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited her to comment on a draft of this decision.
My assessment
People qualify for a badge if they are unable to walk, experience considerable difficulty when walking or are at serious risk of harm when walking.
The guidance says people who can walk 80 metres and do not demonstrate very considerable difficulty in walking are not eligible for a badge. Councils should take into account factors such as pain, speed, balance, gait and shortness of breath when assessing if someone can walk 80 metres.
The Council awarded a Blue Badge to Ms X in 2019. Since then she has had surgery on one leg. Ms X is waiting for surgery on the other leg.
Ms X applied to renew her badge. She had an assessment with a physiotherapist. The therapist noted Ms X has had a good outcome from the first operation. She was aware Ms X is waiting for further surgery but is on first line pain medication. Ms X reported that she walks in the park, three times a week, for up to an hour. The therapist found there was no evidence Ms X could not walk for 80 meters.
The Council asked Ms X’s consultant to comment on whether Ms X qualifies for a badge. The consultant said he did not think she meets the required criteria for a badge. The Council decided not to renew the badge.
Ms X disagrees with the decision and says her condition is no better than when the Council issued the badge in 2019.
I will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely I would find fault by the Council. We do not act as an appeal body and can only consider if there is fault in the way the Council has made a decision. We have no power to award a badge and cannot decide if someone is eligible for a badge.
The Council considered Ms X’s application, the evidence she provided to the physiotherapist and the opinion of her consultant. The Council decided, from the body of evidence, that Ms X had not demonstrated she has considerable difficulty with walking. I appreciate Ms X disagrees but there is no suggestion of fault in the way the Council made this decision.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman