Charged £20 to renew Blue Disabled Parking Badge

jetta_wales

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

You have said this reference photo's before, you can't really select from a menu which good bits you like and which bits you [ a minuscule minority ] don't want.

The new BB Proposals due later this year will allow traffic wardens and parking attendants the power to confiscate badges. Bobbies have had this power since 2006.

People in this group who say "" what about someone that is doing the shopping for the badge holder, who is at home "" the law is clear if the person who the badge is registered to is not in the vehicle, then the badge should not be being used.

Putting the photograph on the ' new rules ' badge therefore means that the police and later this year traffic wardens can instantly and without any need for extra checks or resource's prove the BB is being misused and confiscate it on the spot. Additionally the new BB will have a central dBASE, a bit like the centralised DVLA and insurance dBASE any police of traffic warden will only need to make one quick phone contact instead of for example in London having to telephone the blue badge department of all 32 London boroughs.

The BB is then returned to the issuing authority with details of why it was removed, it remains to be seen whether all rather than the current some will adopt the three strikes” basis before permanently confiscating the badge. Personally I'm against the three strikes rule, I think confiscation should be instant except for specified ' certain ' types ' of illness.

The following 3 strike safeguards were proposed:

a) That the badge holder be given the benefit of doubt
b) That badge holders and any carers receive written notification of cancellation
c) That a simple and robust means of appeal be introduced.
d) That the “three strikes rule” be retained

The problem with just confiscating badges though is that this can then be punishing more vulnerable disabled people for their carer/family's lack of moral fibre. I think heavy fines should be in place say £200, heck make it £50 higher each time, that'll soon sting real bad.

Also I can honestly I've never known anybody, not even on here, to try and claim they can or should be able to use the badge to do somebody's shopping for them if that person isn't with them. That takes a real stretch of the imagination to try and justify that one lol.

bifold

Brassedoff wrote: »

My last first badge was £20 and renewal £12. I have had my photo on both.

If you are not happy to have your photo on it to ensure misuse by others stops, then don't bother applying. You either go with the system, or you don't. If you don't want it, don't apply, park with everyone else in carparks etc.

How many people moan (including me) that badges are misused or given out to people who can walk perfectly well (another issue I know) on here. When a solution that proves the holder must be with the vehicle, and people moan about having their photo on it. As I said. Do not apply to have one, walk like everyone else.

But the system allows for a small section of society to be exempt from photos which includes myself,Its not me who is causing misuse of the blue badge.

bifold

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

You have said this reference photo's before, you can't really select from a menu which good bits you like and which bits you [ a minuscule minority ] don't want.

The new BB Proposals due later this year will allow traffic wardens and parking attendants the power to confiscate badges. Bobbies have had this power since 2006.

People in this group who say "" what about someone that is doing the shopping for the badge holder, who is at home "" the law is clear if the person who the badge is registered to is not in the vehicle, then the badge should not be being used.

Putting the photograph on the ' new rules ' badge therefore means that the police and later this year traffic wardens can instantly and without any need for extra checks or resource's prove the BB is being misused and confiscate it on the spot. Additionally the new BB will have a central dBASE, a bit like the centralised DVLA and insurance dBASE any police of traffic warden will only need to make one quick phone contact instead of for example in London having to telephone the blue badge department of all 32 London boroughs.

The BB is then returned to the issuing authority with details of why it was removed, it remains to be seen whether all rather than the current some will adopt the three strikes” basis before permanently confiscating the badge. Personally I'm against the three strikes rule, I think confiscation should be instant except for specified ' certain ' types ' of illness.

The following 3 strike safeguards were proposed:

a) That the badge holder be given the benefit of doubt
b) That badge holders and any carers receive written notification of cancellation
c) That a simple and robust means of appeal be introduced.
d) That the “three strikes rule” be retained

We shall have to wait for the proposals,I wont need another blue badge. But I cant help thinking that alot of people who get a blue badge Via the GP are in for a shock.

Richie-from-the-Boro

bifold wrote: »

But the system allows for a small section of society to be exempt from photos which includes myself,Its not me who is causing misuse of the blue badge.

BB misuse is rife, the figures are widely available and its 80% down to the BB holder. It's up to the BB community to clear up its own mess by fully supporting the proposals. I have stated that exemptions to the new rules for certain ' medical ' reasons have been agreed. Any previously spurious claims for exemption on displaying a photograph should quite properly be written out of the new legislation.

Everyone and his auntie will claim they are a special case under racial / social / sexual / religious / DDA / HRA et al.

The BB system is a mess, and viewed by society at large as a scam facilitated by BB holders themselves, they are right to see it this way, that's exactly what the figures [ evidence based ] say is happening. The BB community are personally responsible and should be ashamed of their criminal misuse of the liberation [ equal status or just treatment for or on behalf of any group believed to be discriminated against ] this wonderful gift gives.

Arguing for a photograph exemption is not arguing for equal status, its arguing for unequal privileged status, if its granted for race then it should be granted for race / sexuality / religion / Catholics in the Irish north and parts of Glasgow. Its a nonsense there are already reams of very robust legislation covering such eventualities.

BB via the GP and or Consultant will be a no~no, its already agreed that is out. Bifold, I'm not suggesting for a minute that you are causing misuse of the blue badge. I'm just saying that too many who argue for equality with the able bodied want some sort of equality plus that makes them special, you know, personally more equal than the other 99.9% of the BB community.

jetta_wales

I thought the photo exemptions were only for people going through chemo and that kinda thing because their hair loss will change their appearance greatly as will the many options they may wear such as differing wigs or just bandanas.

bifold

jetta_wales wrote: »

I thought the photo exemptions were only for people going through chemo and that kinda thing because their hair loss will change their appearance greatly as will the many options they may wear such as differing wigs or just bandanas.

Thats why I am exempt a photo, and yes I am in a minority colourwise .
And to have a photo on display to all whilst parked at the supermarket do I want my house to be targeted whilst shopping? or mugged because I am a easy target?

jetta_wales

bifold wrote: »

Thats why I am exempt a photo, and yes I am in a minority colourwise .
And to have a photo on display to all whilst parked at the supermarket do I want my house to be targeted whilst shopping? or mugged because I am a easy target?

I really don't think ethnicity should be considered at all. Would we exempt all white people from having photos too if they lived in heavily middle eastern areas of Bradford? No it's one line that would have to be drawn, absolutely.

sunnyone

jetta_wales wrote: »

The problem with just confiscating badges though is that this can then be punishing more vulnerable disabled people for their carer/family's lack of moral fibre. I think heavy fines should be in place say £200, heck make it £50 higher each time, that'll soon sting real bad.

Also I can honestly I've never known anybody, not even on here, to try and claim they can or should be able to use the badge to do somebody's shopping for them if that person isn't with them. That takes a real stretch of the imagination to try and justify that one lol.

You dare to mention moral fiber when you allow your VED exemption to be abused on a daily basis!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The sooner your "partner" gets caught and fined, the better for us all because he and you are giving disabled people a bad name and the previous poster is also right, you allow him to break the law daily so you wouldnt blink an eye for moral judgements like using your BB on private land.

You know the law and choose to ignore it because it suits you too, a person who gets HRMC cannot claim vehicle excise duty exemption if the car is used by someone else for any reason at all unless you are their and you dont go to work everyday with your "partner" or everywhere else the car goes either so he is breaking the law with your permission everyday.

bifold

jetta_wales wrote: »

I really don't think ethnicity should be considered at all. Would we exempt all white people from having photos too if they lived in heavily middle eastern areas of Bradford? No it's one line that would have to be drawn, absolutely.

Ha,Ha,:rotfl:Sorry but I have bright red skin due to graft V host after a bone marrow transplant also having chemo for cancer so no hair.
Ethnicity not a worry,just society should have moved onwards.

jetta_wales

bifold wrote: »

Ha,Ha,:rotfl:Sorry but I have bright red skin due to graft V host after a bone marrow transplant also having chemo for cancer so no hair.
Ethnicity not a worry,just society should have moved onwards.

Ohhh yeah that's quite a different matter altogether, sorry about that