neighbour issues

lemontart

adouglasmhor wrote: »

A mental illness is an illness not a disability, I have PTSD and am not disabled. Also the child has statemented rights an undiagnosed condition confers no such rights.

.

A very broad statement regarding mental health issues for some it can be as serious as a physical disability, including conditions such as yours and render a person unable to leave their home, to work etc - just because you cannot see it does not mean it is not as serious or any less important in terms of support required as for those with a physical disability.

Both physical and mental health issues, impact on quality of life not only for the individual but for their friends and family and both can lead to premature death. Neither is more important than the other.

The op, no one in this thread knows if the lady in question has a diagnosed condition, the only thing we can be sure is that her temper snapped as has everyone else's on occasion to a greater or lesser extent.

dirtysexymonkey

adouglasmhor wrote: »

A mental illness is an illness not a disability, I have PTSD and am not disabled. Also the child has statemented rights an undiagnosed condition confers no such rights.

The neigbour could lawfully have driven at reduced speed with one side of her car's wheels on the pavement. Instead she chose to be a drama queen.

does that not depend on the mental illness? theyre not all the same you know. just like physical disabilities.

the girl could just wheel herself down to the end of the road, but instead she wants special attention. see how that works?

chirpchirp

adouglasmhor wrote: »

It's not an offense to block access to a driveway unless it is marked with a local authority white line marking. It is not always an offense to drive on a pavement. The bus was stopped not parked.Apart from that your post was fine.

It's not an offence to block access to a driveway. I found this on one particular council site:

"Residents experiencing difficulties with vehicles parking across their dropped kerb access can apply for a white line 'H' marking across their driveway. This is a white line which is painted across the access parallel to the kerb and which has short end bars perpendicular to the line.

This is meant to show drivers this is an area where they should not park as they are likely to cause an obstruction. Unfortunately these lines have no legal standing and as a result drivers cannot be fined for parking on them but if the Police are called to deal with the matter the presence of the white lines would strengthen their case for taking action. "

It was from this site: http://www.pkc.gov.uk/Transport+and+streets/Parking+and+car+parks/Parking+-+access+to+property/

Whilst the above is a Scottish website, I can also remember that I was responsible in the mid 90's for getting some white lines put down for people and back then they weren't enforceable in England either.

Nicki

Just a thought but if we accept DSM et al's assertion that the neighbour could have a disability too, and their assertion that OP should have asked the neighbour's permission for the disabled child to board the school bus because this inconvenienced the neighbour, should it not also follow that the neighbour should ask OP's permission to swear and abuse the bus driver in front of her child? Both situations on DSM's reasoning are caused by a disability and I am quite sure the neighbour's behaviour has upset OP just as much as OP's daughter's needs have upset the neighbour

dirtysexymonkey

Nicki wrote: »

Just a thought but if we accept DSM et al's assertion that the neighbour could have a disability too, and their assertion that OP should have asked the neighbour's permission for the disabled child to board the school bus because this inconvenienced the neighbour, should it not also follow that the neighbour should ask OP's permission to swear and abuse the bus driver in front of her child? Both situations on DSM's reasoning are caused by a disability and I am quite sure the neighbour's behaviour has upset OP just as much as OP's daughter's needs have upset the neighbour

it wasnt my assertion, it was the ops. and i didnt say asking for permission - i said making those affected aware that it might happen to they can then make other arrangements if necessary. is this your memory playing tricks again?;)

you have to understand who is responsible for this situation - it is the op. a bit of thought for her neighbour may well have avoided this situation.

Nicki

dirtysexymonkey wrote: »

you have to understand who is responsible for this situation - it is the op. a bit of thought for her neighbour may well have avoided this situation.

I am fairly sure that OP had no control over the fact that her child is in a wheelchair, and was given no choice about what time her child was picked up in the morning, or where the bus would stop. It would also appear that up until this morning on the occasions the neighbour arrived at the same time as the bus, she moved round it by mounting the pavement without raising any objection and therefore the OP had no idea this was causing a major issue until today.

So, no I don't agree the OP is in any way "responsible" for creating the situation, sorry.

fannyanna

Hi OP

Ignoring all the mini arguments (which I think are way OTT) I can see both parties point of view and ultimately think a compromise is needed.

Personally I would be annoyed if a large vehicle (regardless of it's purpose) was blocking access/making it difficult to access my property (especially if I was coming home from a night shift). So from this point of view I can understand why your neighbour was annoyed. Obviously her reaction was childish.

But of course your daughter needs to be collected from school. The pick up point could be moved (which in my view is not necessary and would likely have an adverse impact on you and your daughter) but this would potentially result in another road being partially blocked. So it doesn't resolve the problem - just moves it to another location.

To me it seems pretty simple - COMMUNICATION. Your neighbour should have communicated her desire to get passed the vehicle in a reasonable manner. The driver could have then communicated his solution (which could be if you can wait two minutes I'll be gone or alternatively I will move the bus so that you can pass me and then re-park).

dirtysexymonkey

Nicki wrote: »

I am fairly sure that OP had no control over the fact that her child is in a wheelchair, and was given no choice about what time her child was picked up in the morning, or where the bus would stop. It would also appear that up until this morning on the occasions the neighbour arrived at the same time as the bus, she moved round it by mounting the pavement without raising any objection and therefore the OP had no idea this was causing a major issue until today.

So, no I don't agree the OP is in any way "responsible" for creating the situation, sorry.

once again you need to read properly. this situation was caused because the op didnt deem it necessary to inform her neighbour that she may be inconvenienced. the situation being that the neighbour is inconvenienced - not the rest of it.

claire16c

I can see why it is annoying for the woman to not be able to get into her house if she had to wait for 10 minutes- I used to have problems with public transport on the way back from my old job and I would sometimes be extremely angry and frustrated by the time I got home if Id had a bad day combined with Worst Late Western trains, and 10 minutes more delay outside my drive would have pushed me over the edge.

However, if I could get round the thing causing the delay by just going up the pavement and onto my drive, then I would have just done that and forgotten about it. And not to mention the fact if it was a bus picking up a disabled child then I simply would not have looked at that in the same way as say the bin men (who often park in stupid places in my street just as everyone is leaving to go to work, and reaaaaly take their time picking stuff up, well make that picking stuff up and dropping a load on the floor but thats another subject.. and make no effort to move out the way). Its completely different. And it makes me sick to think someone could shout a load of abuse at children.

adouglasmhor

DUTR wrote: »

The bus is not supposed to block a lowered curb.
.

If avoidable, it's a guideline not a law.