Wheelchair user takes precedence over a mother and two babies in a double-buggy?

ThePrettyDamned

Sporky said:

PolarityMan said:

This should clearly be left to common sense and not dragged through the courts.

We have courts because we have common sense - which is essentially a heady mix of hindsight, ignorance of statistics and wishful thinking.

Probably one of the most perfect sentences I've seen. 

fretmeister

PolarityMan said:

fretmeister said:

The Judgment also says it must be dealt with on a case by case basis. That would suggest modifying the approach to fit each set of moving goalposts, err, possible examples.

Well thats fucking stupid as well. Im sure the supreme mega super court of justice has better things to be doing. This should clearly be left to common sense and not dragged through the courts.

"Dragged through the courts" is a phrase usually used by people who don't realise that it's the disputes between the parties that leads them to the court, and it's the parties who cannot find a way to compromise.

If anything it's one or both parties in the dispute who push it into the courts. And if the issue is considered to be of sufficient importance (such as the interpretation of an Act of Parliament that would affect anyone in the jurisdiction) then the Supreme Court is able to hear the matter.

If it is not that important, then the buck stops at the Court of Appeal.

So while you might think it a waste of time for the SC to hear the appeal, the litigation, started way further down the court ranks, has actually affected every single bus company and their drivers, every disabled person who uses a bus and every buggy user who uses a bus.

That's a lot of people across the entire country. So the SC was doing exactly what it is there to do. 

Rocker

Why or how did such nonsense ever reach the courts?  And why did not some other passenger(s) get off the bus [and wait there for the next bus to arrive] to facilitate both the wheelchair user and the mother with her babies?

Sporky

Rocker said:

Why or how did such nonsense ever reach the courts? 

See Fret's post just before yours.

fretmeister

Rocker said:

Why or how did such nonsense ever reach the courts?  And why did not some other passenger(s) get off the bus [and wait there for the next bus to arrive] to facilitate both the wheelchair user and the mother with her babies?

You have met other humans, right?

Paul_C

Chalky said:

'Wheelchair v buggy': Man wins Supreme Court case - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38663322

The court said "The company should consider some further step to pressurise the non-wheelchair user to vacate the space, depending on the circumstances, it said."

This is daft. Firstly, mothers with babies in double-buggies use the same space on the bus. The idea that an adult wheelchair user on a freezing windswept night can demand that a young mother with two babies can be ejected from a bus is not the right answer. Secondly, there is nothing more the bus driver can do other than ask the mother and babies to get off the bus - the bus driver has no power beyond that.

As a bus driver said to me, no way is he going to try to eject a mother and babies from him bus - his family would disown him!

She wasn't asked to get off the bus, she was asked to move to allow the wheelchair user the space provided for wheelchair users (which is available for buggies etc. if there is no wheelchair user on the bus).

The open space exists due to the efforts of wheelchair users and their friends/supporters to get legislation put in place that would allow them access to public transport.

Chalky

Paul_C said:

Chalky said:

'Wheelchair v buggy': Man wins Supreme Court case - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38663322

The court said "The company should consider some further step to pressurise the non-wheelchair user to vacate the space, depending on the circumstances, it said."

This is daft. Firstly, mothers with babies in double-buggies use the same space on the bus. The idea that an adult wheelchair user on a freezing windswept night can demand that a young mother with two babies can be ejected from a bus is not the right answer. Secondly, there is nothing more the bus driver can do other than ask the mother and babies to get off the bus - the bus driver has no power beyond that.

As a bus driver said to me, no way is he going to try to eject a mother and babies from him bus - his family would disown him!

She wasn't asked to get off the bus, she was asked to move to allow the wheelchair user the space provided for wheelchair users (which is available for buggies etc. if there is no wheelchair user on the bus).

The open space exists due to the efforts of wheelchair users and their friends/supporters to get legislation put in place that would allow them access to public transport.

Spaces for pushchairs existed on some bus designs before they were revised and enlarged for wheelchairs on later designs.  There is no extra space beyond the wheelchair space on the designs in my area.

TheBlueWolf

I  don't think it was daft at all. Reading the full judgement provided by @fretmeister I agree with the result.

thecolourbox

I'm surprised nobody has commented that the wheelchair user probably wasn't using it by choice, whereas having babies is often somewhat more of a life choice

Fretwired

Chalky said:

This is daft. Firstly, mothers with babies in double-buggies use the same space on the bus. The idea that an adult wheelchair user on a freezing windswept night can demand that a young mother with two babies can be ejected from a bus is not the right answer. Secondly, there is nothing more the bus driver can do other than ask the mother and babies to get off the bus - the bus driver has no power beyond that.

As a bus driver said to me, no way is he going to try to eject a mother and babies from him bus - his family would disown him!

What? That a wheelchair user wanted to use a space designated for wheelchair users? What's daft about that?

Fretwired

Chalky said:

This is daft. Firstly, mothers with babies in double-buggies use the same space on the bus. The idea that an adult wheelchair user on a freezing windswept night can demand that a young mother with two babies can be ejected from a bus is not the right answer. Secondly, there is nothing more the bus driver can do other than ask the mother and babies to get off the bus - the bus driver has no power beyond that.

As a bus driver said to me, no way is he going to try to eject a mother and babies from him bus - his family would disown him!

What? That a wheelchair user wanted to use a space designated for wheelchair users? What's daft about that?

BintyTwanger77

Sporky said:

PolarityMan said:

This should clearly be left to common sense and not dragged through the courts.

We have courts because we have common sense - which is essentially a heady mix of hindsight, ignorance of statistics and wishful thinking.

Bang on.

BintyTwanger77

Fretwired said:

Chalky said:

This is daft. Firstly, mothers with babies in double-buggies use the same space on the bus. The idea that an adult wheelchair user on a freezing windswept night can demand that a young mother with two babies can be ejected from a bus is not the right answer. Secondly, there is nothing more the bus driver can do other than ask the mother and babies to get off the bus - the bus driver has no power beyond that.

As a bus driver said to me, no way is he going to try to eject a mother and babies from him bus - his family would disown him!

What? That a wheelchair user wanted to use a space designated for wheelchair users? What's daft about that?

Isn't it pretty clear that the space on the bus is designated for wheelchair users, and for parents with buggies unless a wheelchair user requires it? The rules are set out pretty clearly. I think the judgement was right.

dindude

In my experience a folded buggy only reduces its size (footprint) by about a 3rd, it doesn't exactly disappear, and then you have a child or two to deal with who were in the buggy, so net neutral really.

Sporky

But those three things can be arranged in more convenient ways.

PolarityMan

fretmeister said:

PolarityMan said:

fretmeister said:

The Judgment also says it must be dealt with on a case by case basis. That would suggest modifying the approach to fit each set of moving goalposts, err, possible examples.

Well thats fucking stupid as well. Im sure the supreme mega super court of justice has better things to be doing. This should clearly be left to common sense and not dragged through the courts.

"Dragged through the courts" is a phrase usually used by people who don't realise that it's the disputes between the parties that leads them to the court, and it's the parties who cannot find a way to compromise.

If anything it's one or both parties in the dispute who push it into the courts. And if the issue is considered to be of sufficient importance (such as the interpretation of an Act of Parliament that would affect anyone in the jurisdiction) then the Supreme Court is able to hear the matter.

If it is not that important, then the buck stops at the Court of Appeal.

So while you might think it a waste of time for the SC to hear the appeal, the litigation, started way further down the court ranks, has actually affected every single bus company and their drivers, every disabled person who uses a bus and every buggy user who uses a bus.

That's a lot of people across the entire country. So the SC was doing exactly what it is there to do. 

That *is* a lot of people and to conclude that everything has to be decided on a case by case basis doesn't seem to be a very good use of all that resource. 

fretmeister

It's not just case-by-case.

It is case-by-case-within-a-set-framework.

That is pretty obvious from the judgment.

PolarityMan

Do you have a link to it?

CHRISB50

It's on page one of this thread @PolarityMan ;

Chalky

The daft part is not the use of the space for wheelchairs - the daft part is the concept that a bus driver has to eject a mother and baby from the bus on which they are riding if a wheelchair user just happens to be at the next stop.  Solve the wheelchair users problem by making it a problem for a mother and baby?  A problem that the mother cannot foresee or control except by not using a bus ever?

But from what I read it seems several people on here would turf mothers and babies off buses at the side of the road without a second thought.  Jesus wept.