Buses and Blatant Discrimination- wheelchair users

foxxymynx

robpw2 wrote: »

i have written the company a letter and given them 14 days to provide a satisfactory response or i will take it further ,

Call your council, ask them for the number for their law centre, call them and ask for person who deals with DDA

Savvy_Sue

In Edinburgh, there's a dispute because the buses are not letting buggies on. Read something about it in the Guardian the other day. Might be worth referring to that case when contacting the bus company next: priority to disabled passengers comes first.

Mind you, I'm not sure why you can't get transport to hospital. I know neither of them is in a wheelchair, but my mum and dad regularly get taken together so that they can each be present at the other's appointments. I can't understand why they prefer to be ready hours earlier than if they got a taxi, and then to wait around at the end of the day before being driven all round the houses. They are capable of using public transport (which I realise often isn't at all convenient) and they can afford to use occasional taxis, but because they don't drive they always ask for (and get) hospital transport. I did say to my mum that I'd rather my taxes were spent on treating sick people than transport, but she wants both.

withabix

To Robpw2 and mgn83uk:

Firstly, I apologise if my choice of words has been considered inappropriate or offensive by yourselves and others. That was not my intention - I was purely offering a counter opinion as part of the debate.

What I was attempting to do was point out that there are other views as to what can be expected and what is or is not mandatory.

My use of unnecessary should maybe have been replaced by not essential, however Robpw2 has expanded on the reason for mgn83uk accompanying him on his trip to hospital. It was initially not clear who was the patient etc.

I have absolutely no problem with people with disabilities enjoying their life to the full and travelling where they please, my point being that they cannot expect to be provided with greater provision than their legal entitlement - that would be positive discrimination. Some people do expect such preferential treatment, which would by definition discriminate against others.

In my comments about planning the journey, I was referring to what could be a greater need for planning, where your needs rely on specific facilities being available. For example, you may need to plan for no buses turning up with wheelchair space - for whatever reason, be it full buses, pre-2002 bus with no access, ignorant bus drivers, wheelchair space being occupied, adverse weather etc etc. In suggesting that a wheelchair accessible taxi could have been booked, that would have ensured that your travel requirements were met and eliminated the risk of what actually happened.

Some of the things the OP experience may or may not have been 'blatant discrimination', however, as I have pointed out, sometimes people with disabilities expect to be provided for or treated in a way that amounts to positive discrimination, which is illegal and they cannot expect such treatment. In this particular case, several Acts and Regulations correctly requires that it is possible to get onto a bus in a wheelchair (provided the bus was registered after 2001) and that there is somewhere on the bus that can be easily accessed in a wheelchair and for the wheelchair to occupy that space safely and without endangering other passengers. There is however no provision (as far as I can determine) that the space must be made available if other able-bodied people are occupying it - maybe there should be, maybe there shouldn't, but as others have said, I think the only provision may be in the bus company's Conditions of Carriage, if any provision is made at all.

I agree that the Acts, Regulations and Laws currently in place relating to disability and transport are inadequate and require considerable improvement in terms of provision for those with impaired mobility.

As for comments made about children walking to school - as far as I can remember, the only time my kids have not walked to school have been when one of them had a broken leg, except when the school in question was four miles away down country lanes - in which case walking really was out of the question, for obvious reasons.

As for Supermarket home delivery services, I consider the opposite to be true - they shoud only be used by people who cannot walk or drive to the supermarket, not instead of going there yourself.

Once again, I may not always agree with the opinions of people who start threads, however posting alternative opinions creates debate, which is surely what some of these forums are about? Whilst some people seem to consider that expressing a different opinion to others is somehow 'not being nice to moneysavers', differences of opinion are all part of life and forums would be very small and boring places if we all agreed with each other. The are sections of MSE that appear to be solely intended for agreeing with each other and 'mutual thanking' but this isn't one of them.

nanokitten

withabix, I understand that you may not have deliberatly set out to cause offence. However, the fact that you have had to qualify everything that you said in your post suggests that is was written in a way which people found insensitive and unhelpful. I don't think you have helped the matter by reiterating your views, perhaps a straight apology would be more appropriate.

The purpose of this forum is not as a platform for debate on social policy issues but as an environment for disabled peolple and their carers to pool advice and support one another.

I pointed out that there is a requirement to be nice to other moneysavers because inadvertantly or not you have upset people.

Pssst

This is yet another failure in which we try to create special cases for those who dont need them. I refer of course to the buggy friendly,sit down bus that can stop,sit down and allow buggies to drive straight on and block the aisles. Buses are primarily for pedestrians. Chidlren in buggies should be removed from them and the buggy folded to be carried on board. Another option would be for the child to be carried in a harness arrangment. This would leave the way clear for those needing disable access in a wheelchair so that they could then access the space which has been specially created for them.

Savvy_Sue

I have been thinking about the mobility scooter thing. I suspect this is where Health and Safety considerations crash into the DDA and Health and Safety wins.

The wheelchair spaces I have noticed on buses all require the chair to be parked facing the back of the bus, with a stretch of padding rising behind the occupant's head. Presumably this is considered the safest position: if the bus stops suddenly, hopefully the occupant will suffer minimal injury, and won't be thrown through the windows of the bus.

I'm no expert on mobility scooters, but my impression is that a) they are all longer than conventional wheelchairs, b) they are much heavier (possibly no heavier than a 'conventional' electric wheelchair but certainly much heavier than a people powered one) c) there are few side restraints / arms and d) the occupant is usually much further forward on the wheelbase than in a conventional wheelchair shape.

So it may be that there is no 'safe' way of parking a mobility scooter on a bus without significant risk of injury to the occupant and other passengers should the driver brake suddenly. And on my journeys there's usually at least one incident where I end up hanging on to the seat in front of me.

You might argue that if the person could get their scooter on, they might be able to 'park' it, get out and occupy a seat -.not all would be capable of this, but some might. Even so, the weight of a scooter skidding the length of a bus in an accident could be an interesting factor, and one which the H&S inspectors on public transport have decided is too problematic.

I know H&S is wrongly blamed for all sorts of 'bans', but I wonder if it is a valid factor here?

Mrs_Ryan

Hi Savvy_Sue, thanks for your thoughts.

Im not able to go into too much detail due to the case being handled by legal people, but I can basically tell you what this is about.
My mum lives in Newcastle, where there is a light railway system called the Metro. This is the main form of transport in the suburb where she lives - the buses are a bit few and far between, and most will not carry scooters due to the fact that they are too heavy for the ramps. Up until April of this year, the Metro accepted mobility scooters. But, there was an incident in which a scooter crashed through metal doors of the Metro landing on the track. This lead to a restriction of use, and then finally in October they were banned altogether due to another incident with what was not a scooter, it was an electric wheelchair. There was a subsidised taxi-link service which scooter users could use for a nominal fee, but this is being scrapped and replaced with a system where scooter users are given a £2 voucher to use towards the costs of a taxi with one approved company - which happen to be VERY expensive, and the user must cover the cost of the rest of the journey, which can be anything up to £20 one way :eek:
There is no free public transport available to use. However, the argument of the train operating company is that scooters are very heavy and can cause considerable damage, yet despite an accident being caused by an electric wheelchair and (I've researched this) the vast majority of electric wheelchairs on the market being heavier than most makes of scooter, they refuse to restrict the use of them as it would contravene the DDA.
I have no problem with people using electric wheelchairs - dont get me wrong. But we seem to have come up against a lot of people who seem to think that everyone who uses mobility scooters does so because they are too fat and lazy to get out and walk, and could use public transport if they wanted.
We have made such a fuss for people like my mum who have no other choice. She cannot walk, and she cannot operate a manual wheelchair herself. My dad has emphysema which is becoming increasingly worse so he struggles to get himself even short distances let alone my mum. She has spent a lot of money on her scooter so she couldnt afford an electric wheelchair even if it was an option for her. She is basically a prisoner in her own home - she gets assistance to go out once a week! However, we have been told there is some light at the end of the tunnel by the legal people, so hopefully it will be good news soon.

Savvy_Sue

I'm fascinated at the thought that not allowing electric wheelchairs contravenes the DDA, even though there are obvious safety concerns given their weight, but not allowing scooters is OK!

foxxymynx

There are some differences between scooters and electric wheelchairs - size, monouverability, position of the seat etc etc. The sad thing is though, that some people use scooters out of laziness (a minority!) and it's because of them that others face so much prejudice etc. A scooter does have it's benefits though - like people not trying to sit on you! (yes, it does happen!)

mgn83uk

There are differences between electric wheelchairs and scooters, nominally the size and weight. I agree that some electric wheelchairs may be heavier than some scooters, but some manual wheelchairs may be heaver than either, particuarly if they're an older design. I'm fortunate, mine [manual wheelchair] is a 2005 model, and reasonably lightweight at 15kg (slightly more than 7x 2 litre bottles of coke, to put it in perspective).

I think the main issue (and i'm not justifying the Metro's stance) with scooters is that the design varies much more than with wheelchairs; generally, wheelchairs get smaller but retain the same shape - particuarly if the user has had one produced specifically for them in consultation with an appropriate engineer - but scooters (from what I know) generally tend to be purchased off-the-shelf.

They also generally have a much wider wheelbase and larger turning circle.

I can see the issues with them being on public transport as a result of this, although I believe it should be taken on a case by case basis. It's difficult to design vehicles to accomodate everybody, hence the government's terminology of a "reference wheelchair" - although it should be noted that some buses/trains can barely accomodate mine, which is smaller in all dimensions than the "reference" dimensions!

Getting back to the original point; I don't expect preferential treatment. I don't consider being able to travel on a bus preferential to any more of an extent than providing push buttons to open heavy doors (anyone who has tried opening a heavy steel door while trying to manoevure a manual wheelchair - bearing in mind that the wheels operate steer independently - will appreciate this), especially as such things can be used by anyone (those with heavy shopping, luggage, etc).

However, I still believe that wheelchair uses should have absolute priority for the use of wheelchair spaces on buses, as it is the only safe place that someone such as myself can travel. Blocking the aisle is dangerous to me and everyone else.

The reason for that "ironing board" as one local bus driver described it is simple; should a bus stop suddenly, the motion will shunt even a braked wheelchair in the direction of travel prior to such a stop. If the occupant was facing forwards, they could be thrown out of the wheelchair, or fall forward and bring it falling on top of them in belted chairs (the seatbelt on wheelchairs being provided nominally to stop the user slipping forward during use).

Additionally, after the bus jerks back following a stop, the wheelchair would then pivot on the rear wheel, which could cause the above if it has not already happened. In essence therefore, the "ironing board" is there as an impact resisting device, especially as wheelchair seat backs are rarely solid and such a stop could cause damage to the user's head and back otherwise.

This obviously doesn't apply on trains, as the movement isn't the same.

-Mark