Equality Act 2010 : Pregnancy & Maternity

AoD

I am trying to help some neighbours who have both unfortunately already paid their invoice to the PPC who have been employed in the development where I live.

One was pregnant (literally about to go into labour) and the other had a baby under 6 months.

Our Development Manager is meeting the PPC soon to discuss parking issues and I have raised the point of The Equality Act 2010, and how he should insist that both women are refunded or legal action could follow. He said he is aware of the Act but does not see how it applies in these circumstances.

Am I right in thinking it is this part, section 17, that is applicable?

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/17

Does anyone know if there has been any Court Cases or legal interpretation of the Act that might help here?

Thanks!

Umkomaas

Coupon-mad is the forum's EA expert and I'm sure she will comment. She does tend to do the night shift on here, so it may be later before you get any input from her (although she does sometimes login during lunch breaks at work).

The_Deep

You should also bring to his attention what happened to a PPC who pushed its luck.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?377246-UKPC-liable-for-trespass-**SUCCESS**

Most of these PPCs are operating, with the collusion of managing agents, at the bounds of, or even outside The Landlord and Tenant Act. Disturbing the "Quiet Enjoyment" of a leaseholder can be a criminal offence, and ticketing a car in a resident's bay a trespass, depending on the terms set out in the lease.

In most cases permits issued by the MA or the PPC have no validity, and penalising an occupier for failing to display one could land both in very hot water.

System

AoD wrote: »

Am I right in thinking it is this part, section 17, that is applicable?

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/17

Does anyone know if there has been any Court Cases or legal interpretation of the Act that might help here?

Thanks!

Ignoring the scam that is PPC for the moment, have they been treated unfavourably compared to anybody else? I don't think so personally, they seem to have been treated the same.

da_rule

I can't see where you have said that they have been treated less favourably?

The Halsburys Annotations on s.17 give these examples of how the section might be applied:

• A cafe owner must not ask a woman to leave his caf! because she is breastfeeding her baby.
• A shopkeeper must not refuse to sell cigarettes to a woman because she is pregnant.
• A school must not prevent a pupil taking an exam because she is pregnant

The EA does require reasonable changes to be made, and in the case of parking that could be allowing more time, but my understanding is that the requirement to make reasonable changes only applies to the protected characteristic of disability rather than pregnancy.

Coupon-mad

da_rule wrote: »

The EA does require reasonable changes to be made, and in the case of parking that could be allowing more time, but my understanding is that the requirement to make reasonable changes only applies to the protected characteristic of disability rather than pregnancy.

That is right - the protection to pregnant women is not to make 'reasonable adjustments' but to ensure they are not treated unfavourably due to their condition.

So whilst you could argue that a 90 minute arbitrary time limit could be unfair on pregnant women who might be slower to shop, might need the loo more often, etc. (and therefore was a form of sex discrimination of that section of the female population), I can't see where there would necessarily be any discrimination in issuing a fake PCN for say, not displaying a permit. Unless it was a case of the lady going indoors and up some stairs to a flat to get the permit, then coming back downstairs to find a ticket already on the windscreen. That would be unfair as a too-short grace period, potentially.

AoD

Thanks everyone for your replies. More details now obtained.

The lady in question had put her car in a visitors bay (which requires a visitors permit) as she was unable to get to her private parking bay in time due to her going into labour. She did not have time to move her car to her space (which was actually blocked at the time due to some double parking) or get a visitors permit.

Coupon-mad

But they've both paid, you said. Astonishing.

The Parking Prankster is helping people to obtain refunds for paid fake PCNs:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/reclaim-service-launched.html

HTH