The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal of a blue badge. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.
The complaint
Mrs X said the Council wrongly refused a blue badge for her child. She said the Council had wrongly deemed evidence of neurological conditions to be historic. She said it also referred to the absence of any personal independence payments (PIPs), when her child is too young to receive them.
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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs X rightly refers to neurological conditions as being lifelong. And she is correct that a child cannot receive PIPs. Suggesting otherwise would have been fault.
However, the Council’s letter after the appeal panel does not do either.
The letter shows the panel took the view that the child’s assessments having been carried out five years ago or more was relevant. The letter referred to the child’s behaviours now not necessarily being the same as they were at the earlier time. It pointed out it had seen no more recent evidence of how the child was currently affected by the neurological conditions. The child was pre-school when the assessments Mrs X provided were carried out and has now been of school age for several years. While a child with a neurological condition will have the condition for life, the way the condition affects the child’s behaviour and needs may change over time. In the absence of any more recent evidence of how the child was affected by the neurological conditions, the panel could question whether the behaviours referred to in the assessments provided were still the same and whether a new blue badge was required. It would not be fault to do so. Should Mrs X produce new evidence of how her child is affected by the conditions, she could apply again for a blue badge.
The Council’s letter states that Mrs X had said her child would have reached the threshold for a PIP had she been eligible. The letter seems to be a response to a point. It does not read as suggesting Mrs X could apply for a PIP for her child.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman