Pushchair users v Wheelchair user

[Trident 4194]

Sorry, but i disagree with arguments on here regarding this situation.

Surely the legislation is designed so that disabled people are treated in exactly the same way as able bodied people. If the bus pulls up at a stop and a wheelchair user is already occupying the space and a pushchair user wished to board, then unless the pushchair is folded down, then they have to wait for the next service. However if a pushchair user is already occupying the space, then if the pushchair user is unwilling to fold the pushchair (and it may be difficult), then the wheelchair user must wait for the next service.

I see both sides of the argument, it is true what stu said but then it's life unfortunately

[trident4370]

Hopefully we haven't heard the last of this.

[Tony]

Hopefully we haven't heard the last of this.

No hopefully we have, any other ruling would have put drivers in an impossible position

[notepanel]

Hopefully we haven't heard the last of this.

Hopefully from a bus company prospective we have. You can go into the rights/wrongs of the argument for ever - but ultimately the judgment from the last case made the bus company legally responsible for the actions of its passengers - something it can't have control over.

In addition there is (currently) no requirement that a bus even needs to be accessible to wheelchairs. First could be found 'guilty' in this case, but then change the route to step-entrance operation meaning the man can never travel and in theory face no repercussions.

If it is decided by the lawmakers that wheelchair users should have the space no matter what, it needs to be the law for the person sat with the pram/sat in the wheelchair space etc. rather than the bus company. (E.g. your legal duty as a passenger, rather than the legal duty of the company).

In reality, this would be a silly law - there are far to many 'what ifs' - What if the pram is carrying a disabled child? What if the mother of the child in the pram is disabled and unable to lift the child/fold the pram? What if the space is occupied by a disabled person with a zimmer frame, where the bus only has a small wheelchair/buggy zone with no where else safe to accommodate the zimmer frame? Don't forget its not even got to be a pram, it could in theory be anyone sat in the bay - even without prams, trolleys etc.

[Gareth]

I agree with the outcome. There is nothing more than a driver can do, but ask a passenger if they are able to fold a buggy. And a lot of them are practically unfoldable.
I have every sympathy for a wheelchair user, I imagine that life can be tough, but surely any passenger with any decency will do the right thing. Hopefully the mass tutting of every other passenger on a bus will be enough to shame someone.

[Tony]

A lot of Disablility laws are done with good intentions, but actually in practice work out stupidly.

You have a train running from Inverness to Thurso with one disabled toilet on board and one normal toilet. On the way to Thurso the disabled toilet breaks. Because that train now only has a non-disabled it is illegal for it to start a new Journey (back to Inverness) meaning all passengers now have a two hour wait for the next one - including any disabled people.

If Scotrail use a train without any toilets fitted whatsoever that is legal!

[andy]

A lot of Disablility laws are done with good intentions, but actually in practice work out stupidly.

You have a train running from Inverness to Thurso with one disabled toilet on board and one normal toilet. On the way to Thurso the disabled toilet breaks. Because that train now only has a non-disabled it is illegal for it to start a new Journey (back to Inverness) meaning all passengers now have a two hour wait for the next one - including any disabled people.

If Scotrail use a train without any toilets fitted whatsoever that is legal!

Is that to do with distance? Or Scottish law? On a 350 the 'Universal' toilet (the expression disabled is not allowed) is always the first one to screw up leaving only the standard one. In many cases that one can screw up too leaving no working toilets. And the 323's only have standard toilets. Yet nothing ever gets cancelled for these reasons even if the train is going all the way to Euston or Liverpool?

[Tony]

A lot of Disablility laws are done with good intentions, but actually in practice work out stupidly.

You have a train running from Inverness to Thurso with one disabled toilet on board and one normal toilet. On the way to Thurso the disabled toilet breaks. Because that train now only has a non-disabled it is illegal for it to start a new Journey (back to Inverness) meaning all passengers now have a two hour wait for the next one - including any disabled people.

If Scotrail use a train without any toilets fitted whatsoever that is legal!

Is that to do with distance? Or Scottish law? On a 350 the 'Universal' toilet (the expression disabled is not allowed) is always the first one to screw up leaving only the standard one. In many cases that one can screw up too leaving no working toilets. And the 323's only have standard toilets. Yet nothing ever gets cancelled for these reasons even if the train is going all the way to Euston or Liverpool?

323s, not having a universal toilet are exempt until 2020, when they will have to have one fitted, or the normal one removed (which also makes them legal from 2020!)

The law states that trains should not start a journey with the disabled toilet not working (if there is one) so if it screws up on route it can continue. A lot of 350s run in pairs and threes into & out of Euston, so will still have a Universal toilet on departure even if it is in another unit

[andy]

Well that's interesting. I know for a fact that 4 car 350's run into Euston with no Universal and straight back out again on a regular basis.

[Sh4318]

I think the wheelchair user should always receive first priority, but that's just my opinion

[Gareth]

I think the wheelchair user should always receive first priority, but that's just my opinion

In a perfect world yes, but sadly the world is far from perfect. The bus is full to capacity, the buggy is practically unfoldable and the poor excuse of a luggage area is full. Where does the buggy go? Where does mother and child go? After much arguing with the driver, they have to get off. But she paid cash fare and the operator has an exact fare policy. How does she catch the next bus?
After a long delay in arguing and getting off and wheelchair getting on, it's now everybody who's missed their train connection, not just the wheelchair passenger.

[Tony]

I think the wheelchair user should always receive first priority, but that's just my opinion

What makes a wheelchair user any different from any other disabled person? Are we saying that someone with an amputated finger should be able to get on a full bus at the expense of someone in front of him in the queue?

[AndrewLee]

Isn't this argument about equality? So with that a wheelchair user could wait for the next bus just as an able bodied person would have to say if the bus is full. Seems to me that as soon as they don't get preferential treatment (which contradicts equality for others) then there's a big song and dance about it. Yes it's harsh having to be in a wheelchair but the world doesn't owe you everything all of the time.

[the trainbasher]

Easy way to sort it out.

Child fare holders must stand whenever an adult fare holder wants to sit down
Buggys must be folded
Only one space allowed on the bus for wheelchairs who pre book.

[trident4370]

The fact that priority space is lacking on buses should be all the more argument to say it should be kept for those who need it most, not those who use it for convenience.