Disabled spaces on private land

fisherjim

Fruitcake wrote: »

I did, along with many other posters.

I can see that there is a need for some wider bays. What I can't see is why they have to be exclusively for people with children, especially if they don't actually need wider bays. I also don't understand why they have to be close to the shop entrance.

Maybe the answer is that if you need to use a wider bay for kiddy evacuation etc you pay a premium for it if it is so essential, that would sort it out!

aguynameddarryl

fisherjim wrote: »

Maybe the answer is that if you need to use a wider bay for kiddy evacuation etc you pay a premium for it if it is so essential, that would sort it out!

Perhaps you could do the same for disabled but non-BB holders?

Half_way

aguynameddarryl wrote: »

Perhaps you could do the same for disabled but non-BB holders?

you dont appear to have grasped the basic issue here:

Reasonable provision has to be made for those with disabilities under the equalities act, people who are disabled and who may require provision may not always have a blue badge.
Shops etc can not charge any extra for this provision, usualy stores/ retailers/ private sector does this by providing disabled bays, or in some cases assisted parking/shopping/extra help and so on, they do this because they have to

Peope with small children have no such statutory rights to any additional provision , anything provided is there because stores want to do it, they have absolutely no obligation to do so P&C bays are therefore an unnecessary gimmick.

aguynameddarryl

Half_way wrote: »

you dont appear to have grasped the basic issue here:

No, you don't seem to have grasped my point.

They HAVE made reasonable provision for disabled drivers. They are now going beyond that, and providing an availability, at their own discretion, for other people who may have a need. Because they have no obligation to provide those spaces is neither here nor there.

*Edit - I would grant that perhaps my sarcasm did not come across quite as strongly as it was intended in my previous post

Fruitcake

fisherjim wrote: »

Maybe the answer is that if you need to use a wider bay for kiddy evacuation etc you pay a premium for it if it is so essential, that would sort it out!

But would it be fair to expect someone who needs a wider space to stick a newly purchased ironing board etcetera in their car to pay extra?

You've bought something in our shop, now we are going to charge you extra so you can put it in your car.

Fruitcake

aguynameddarryl wrote: »

Perhaps you could do the same for disabled but non-BB holders?

You could charge a premium for non disabled people to use a wider bay, but not disabled non-BB holders as that would be a breach of the EA2010.

Iceweasel

aguynameddarryl wrote: »

No, you don't seem to have grasped my point.

They HAVE made reasonable provision for disabled drivers. They are now going beyond that, and providing an availability, at their own discretion, for other people who may have a need. Because they have no obligation to provide those spaces is neither here nor there.

*Edit - I would grant that perhaps my sarcasm did not come across quite as strongly as it was intended in my previous post

Jesus wept - they have NOT made provision for disabled drivers.

They have made provision only for those disabled drivers that qualify under a particular set of rules and therefore are rightly entitled to a Blue Badge.

The rest of the disabled and those entitled to the consideration necessary under the EA 2010 get damn all.

The Blue Badge scheme and EA 2010 are NOT the same thing.

Now you tell me what provision you would make for those who come under the EA 2010 rules but who do not qualify for a BB?

Or do you feel that they don't matter - because that in effect is what I am reading in your posts.

Please tell me that I'm wrong and you do want to help those many without a BB.

Pearlstar

I am not disabled, I do however has a car with ridiculously large doors, I would like a wider parking space, it does not need to be close to the store.

I always try to avoid our local supermarket just after school pick up when lots of the mums and children arrive and park in the p and c spaces. Stupid store doesn't seem to have noticed and increased check out staff.

Guys_Dad

Too many car parks have far too narrow parking spaces - no doubt to cram in as many as possible or, as they have been advised, to maximise the number of shoppers who can be accommodated.

Not only that, but they are often not deep enough for the larger modern cars.

People who are worried about getting their doors banged - and I guess I am one too - get a Citroen Cactus with its air bumps in the door! (I haven't got one, but think the air bumps are a great idea)

Fruitcake

According to a House of Commons Library paper Sainsbugs were implementing a system where the disabled bays were accessible only by a barrier operated by electronic card obtainable by applying in store. This would only work OK for regular shoppers but would be a bit awkward for one off visits. Where does the disabled person park while they go and get a card key? My concern would still be for disabled non-BB holders. Are Sainsbugs savvy enough to know that the EA2010 applies here?

The same Library letter states that the previous Con-Dem government were considering introducing BBs for shorter than the current three year periods for people with temporary disabilities. The suggested periods were twelve or eighteen months. I wonder if the Torys will progress this.