Disability discrimination by leeds united football club

leedsmodus

i regularly go to visit championship football matches, i live in leeds but support another team (middlesbrough), Usually a lot of clubs allow someone claiming d.l.a. high rate mobility to get a carer in free to watch a match, so 2 adults pay one ticket. I bring my carer i.e. wife and ,my son whom normally pays for a chillds ticket. most clubs allow disabled people to sit were they think would be most accesible for them, depending on what seats are available. In another words though they have spaces for wheel chairs if i feel i am capable of climbing 1 step then im ok to sit there. So usually I pay for one adult ticket, 1 free ticket for carer and 1 child ticket. I hope you get the gist

However Leeds United disgust me. All disabled people HAVE to sit in a special area reserved for disabled people. No freedom to make my own assumption of were is easily assessible for me. (not all disabled people are in wheelchairs) but what disgusts is that children have to pay for the FULL adult price ticket to sit in the disabled area

So basically theyre discriminating against those disabled people whom have children, are disabled people not expected to have children. They say there are no consessions for children in the disabled area. ALSO Why should i be made to sit with disabled people and cast aside in a area like a leper.

i complained to the club to no avail,

i really want some ideas were to go with this

leedsmodus

An example, if i go to middlesbroughs or doncaster ground, me,wifey and son have to buy one adult and one child ticket and they find me a seat suited to my needs, they go out their way. sometimes they may say it will involve 2 or 3 steps but i can normally manage with help of the missus. With leeds its the case of all seats are sold out in the ''DISABLED'' area so to sit elsewhere you will have to pay full price tickets

jetta_wales

I can kind of understand them only allowing a free carer ticket to so many people per game as they are losing money for those seats in every sold out game but to dictate where you sit is wrong in my opinion and to make you pay extra for your child is disgraceful.

leedsmodus

i too can understand they have limited tickets for carers, but some matches i have known there be thousands of empty seats in the main stands which i could easily manage to get too yet because there disabled section is full i am not allowed in as a disabled person, it would mean me paying as a full supporter for all 3 of us.
Middlesbrough for example would allow thousands of disabled people with a free carer., in if on the day there are thousands of seats free everywhere in the stadium. at the end of the day as a disabled supporter with a carer we also spend money in the stadium on food,drink, guides/match day programmes etc etc.
Leeds are just being greedy discriminative a***hol**

nannytone_2

i'm not defending Leeds United, but possibly there are insurance implications that are the deciding factor in where diabled people can sit? for instance, if a disabled person climbed the steps into a different seat and fell?

possibly the want the most 'at risk' people to be in the safest seats?

fedupconsumer

Its not just Leeds I am afraid another championship club have been discriminating people for years and I am not talking about just carers tickets , but actually breaking the DDA 1995 and the equality act. So much so this season I have taken the decision not to support them, just say they are in the play offs and if they do go up many disabled fans will not be able to go to games because of the decisions made by the board. With the chance to see Man U or Chelsea sicking really.. You got of lightly.

leedsmodus

is it welsh or english ??
i cannot believe the difference between likes of middlesboro and doncaster whom literally bend over backwards to help disabled folk, and then you get the clubs like the one you are on about and leeds. totally disgraceful,. i refuse to go to leeds matches, i would gladly take my 6yr old son once/twice monthly if they had a similar policy to boro. but if im shunted off into a disabled area i object to paying an adult ticket for a 6yr old child and being treat like a leper tucked away quietly in a corner

leedsmodus

nannytone wrote: »

i'm not defending Leeds United, but possibly there are insurance implications that are the deciding factor in where diabled people can sit? for instance, if a disabled person climbed the steps into a different seat and fell?

possibly the want the most 'at risk' people to be in the safest seats?

maybe so but is doesnt mean they should charge disabled peoples children the full adult rate because there are no child concessions in the disabled area. it is like saying that if you are disabled you should not be having children

leedsmodus

whoops forgot the comment having the most at risk people in the safest seats, what about all the pitch side seats around the stadiums which are usually accessible via the tunnels that police/ambulances etc use, the same entrances many clubs allow wheelchair users to use. so that comment doesnt add up

dmg24

leedsmodus wrote: »

whoops forgot the comment having the most at risk people in the safest seats, what about all the pitch side seats around the stadiums which are usually accessible via the tunnels that police/ambulances etc use, the same entrances many clubs allow wheelchair users to use. so that comment doesnt add up

Yes, it does. In the event of an emergency the stewards need to know where those who require assistance are to ensure they are a priority. They cannot do that if you are spread out around the ground.

daska

nannytone wrote: »

i'm not defending Leeds United, but possibly there are insurance implications that are the deciding factor in where diabled people can sit? for instance, if a disabled person climbed the steps into a different seat and fell?

possibly the want the most 'at risk' people to be in the safest seats?

but you'd expect this to be a common policy at most clubs if it was a problem with insurance, it does sound more likely to be an over officious H&S decision.

I'm trying to think of a good comparison but can't come up with one that's quite the same. You can't legally stop a disabled person from viewing and/or renting a flat which could be difficult/dangerous for them to access, wouldn't you have the same problem with insurance for halls and stairways? But can you stop a disabled person using a swimming pool if there isn't a hoist to get them out?