Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Blue Badge because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, disagrees with the Council’s decision that he does not qualify for a Blue Badge. He says the Council did not consider his application fairly and has failed to issue a badge as a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the Blue Badge decision and the medical evidence. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

5. People may qualify for a badge if they are unable to walk, experience considerable difficulty when walking or are at serious risk of harm when walking.

6. People may also qualify if they have a hidden disability which causes considerable psychological distress when walking or puts the applicant or others at risk of harm when walking. This is known as the hidden disability criteria. Not everyone with a hidden disability will qualify for a badge.
7. Mr X applied for a badge under the hidden disability rules. He supplied evidence which stated he has a mental health condition and referred to a previous incident which affected his mental health. Mr X says the incident, and his mental health condition, mean he suffers from overwhelming psychological distress when walking. He says he could present a risk to strangers as he always feels on edge. Mr X says the problem is particularly acute at night and he feels safer if he can park as close as possible to his destination.
8. The Council considered the guidance and the medical evidence but decided Mr X does not qualify for a badge. Some points it noted were that his problems are intermittent, that he had not provided evidence that he experiences overwhelming psychological distress on every journey, and no evidence he is at risk of harm or poses a risk to other people. The Council also found that a badge was unlikely to assist with his fear of strangers or open spaces. The Council issued its appeal response in April 2023.
9. In response to a draft of this decision Mr X sent a medical report relating to an assessment he had in June 2023. I checked with the Council and it said it had not received a copy of the report from Mr X. Mr X thinks the Council’s decision should be reviewed in relation to the new medical report (written in July).
10. I will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely I would find fault. 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 it is not my role to decide if Mr X is eligible for a badge.
11. The Council considered all the evidence and assessed it against the qualifying criteria and the guidance. I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the decision but I have not seen anything to suggest fault in the way the Council reached its view.
12. Mr X has new medical evidence which he thinks shows entitlement to a badge. The report was written after the Council made its decision and Mr X has not sent the report to the Council. I can only consider how the Council dealt with evidence that was submitted. I cannot take into account evidence that was written after the Council made its final decision and the Council has not seen. Mr X could make a new application and submit the new report. I do not know what the outcome of any new application would be and it would be for the Council to assess a new application and make a new decision.
13. Mr X says he is entitled to a badge as a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act. The Equality Act says organisations should make reasonable adjustments to help people with disabilities access services. The Equality Act does not provide a passport to qualification for a badge. Reasonable adjustments would apply in the case of a badge application if someone needed, for example, correspondence in large print or if someone needed an alternative way to provide proof of identify.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman