The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Blue Badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to give her a Blue Badge. She says she has physical and mental health conditions and needs a 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 consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council. This includes her application form and supporting evidence. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mrs X to comment on a draft of this decision.
My assessment
People who receive descriptor E of a benefit called Personal Independence Payment (PIP) qualify for a Blue Badge without further assessment. If people do not qualify on the basis of their PIP they must demonstrate, through further assessment, that they have considerable difficulties with walking. This can include psychological difficulties.
Mrs X applied for a badge under the PIP rules. The Council refused the application because Mrs X receives descriptor F. Descriptor F does not mean someone qualifies for a badge. The Council told Mrs X she would need to provide evidence she is virtually unable to walk.
Mrs X provided a letter showing she has an appointment with a pain clinic next year. She also provided a letter stating she has been receiving therapy for traumatic stress. The Council considered the evidence but decided Mrs X had not shown she meets the criteria to be awarded a badge.
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council considered the evidence provided by Mrs X but decided it does not show she qualifies under the PIP rules or the further assessment rules. The evidence Mrs X provided gave no information about her health conditions, how far she can walk or how her mobility is affected by her mental health. The Council’s decision flows from the evidence so there is no reason to start an investigation.
We are not an appeal body and we cannot decide if someone qualifies for a badge – that is the role of the Council. I can only consider how the Council assessed the application and there is no suggestion of fault in the way the Council did that assessment.
Final decision
We will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman