Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
08 Dec 14
11:43
Joined:
Date Joined:
10 Jan 12
First Bus wins wheelchair court judgement
Doug Paulley, 36, was denied access to a bus when a woman with a pram refused to move because her baby was sleeping
Appeal over bus wheelchair ruling
Bus companies are not required by law to force parents with buggies to make way for wheelchair users in designated bays on vehicles, senior judges ruled.
First Bus appealed against a court ruling, won by a disabled man from West Yorkshire, that the firm's wheelchair policy was discriminatory.
Doug Paulley, 36, was denied access to a First bus to Leeds when a woman with a pushchair refused to move.
The Court of Appeal overturned a Leeds County Court judgement in his favour.
'Request not require'
Mr Paulley had attempted to board the bus in Wetherby to visit his parents in Leeds, in February 2012.
But, he was told to wait for another one when the woman with the pushchair refused to move because her baby was asleep.
First's policy was one of "requesting but not requiring" non-disabled travellers, including those with babies and pushchairs, to vacate space needed by a wheelchair user.
In September, the county court judge had said the firm's policy was in breach of the Equality Act 2010.
Mr Paulley was awarded £5,500 damages.
'Occasionally prevented'
But earlier, judges at the Court of Appeal ruled the "proper remedy" for wheelchair users to get improvements in such cases was to ask parliament.
Lord Justice Lewison said: "The judge seems to me to have thought that the needs of wheelchair users trumped all other considerations.
"If that is what he meant, I respectfully disagree."
Lord Justice Underhill said: "It has to be accepted that our conclusion and reasoning in this case means that wheelchair users will occasionally be prevented by other passengers from using the wheelchair space on the bus.
"I do not, however, believe that the fact that some passengers will - albeit rarely - act selfishly and irresponsibly is a sufficient reason for imposing on bus companies a legal responsibility for a situation which is not of their making and which they are not in a position to prevent."
Doug Paulley, 36, was denied access to a bus when a woman with a pram refused to move because her baby was sleeping
Appeal over bus wheelchair ruling
Bus companies are not required by law to force parents with buggies to make way for wheelchair users in designated bays on vehicles, senior judges ruled.
First Bus appealed against a court ruling, won by a disabled man from West Yorkshire, that the firm's wheelchair policy was discriminatory.
Doug Paulley, 36, was denied access to a First bus to Leeds when a woman with a pushchair refused to move.
The Court of Appeal overturned a Leeds County Court judgement in his favour.
'Request not require'
Mr Paulley had attempted to board the bus in Wetherby to visit his parents in Leeds, in February 2012.
But, he was told to wait for another one when the woman with the pushchair refused to move because her baby was asleep.
First's policy was one of "requesting but not requiring" non-disabled travellers, including those with babies and pushchairs, to vacate space needed by a wheelchair user.
In September, the county court judge had said the firm's policy was in breach of the Equality Act 2010.
Mr Paulley was awarded £5,500 damages.
'Occasionally prevented'
But earlier, judges at the Court of Appeal ruled the "proper remedy" for wheelchair users to get improvements in such cases was to ask parliament.
Lord Justice Lewison said: "The judge seems to me to have thought that the needs of wheelchair users trumped all other considerations.
"If that is what he meant, I respectfully disagree."
Lord Justice Underhill said: "It has to be accepted that our conclusion and reasoning in this case means that wheelchair users will occasionally be prevented by other passengers from using the wheelchair space on the bus.
"I do not, however, believe that the fact that some passengers will - albeit rarely - act selfishly and irresponsibly is a sufficient reason for imposing on bus companies a legal responsibility for a situation which is not of their making and which they are not in a position to prevent."
Show More
Imagine what would have happened if he would have just waited for the next bus, got on it and went about his normal day.
woman on bus can stand with baby in arms, but the wheelchair man (who cant stand) has to wait in the cold for the next bus.
Yes but it relies on someone being on hand to fold and unfold the pram.
I bet crisp77 wouldn't let his seat out for the old dears.
SELFISH TIMES
SELFISH TIMES
There is no sensible reason why prams should not be banned on buses, or at least
made to pay extra, there is only so much space and must be used wisely.
made to pay extra, there is only so much space and must be used wisely.
I'm sure Toes would have given up his seat. If he hadn't slid off it, because it was sloping.
It's a tough case and you have to have a degree of sympathy for the woman with the sleeping baby but I can't help but feel this could act as a green light for lots of other people to refuse to move from the wheelchair space in future.
A shame that a degree of common sense could not be used. Instead some fkin lawyer w@nker cleans up.
Lord Justice Underhill said: "I do not, however, believe that the fact that some passengers will - albeit rarely - act selfishly and irresponsibly is a sufficient reason for imposing on bus companies a legal responsibility for a situation which is not of their making and which they are not in a position to prevent."
Dec 8, 2014 -- 12:40PM, rob_dylan wrote:
A shame that a degree of common sense could not be used.
I agree with rob-dylan...he puts it more eloquently than me
If the baby ever ends up in a wheelchair,it will have a story to tell
The conclusion seems the right verdict in the end. I suppose we don't know the finer details - what was said between him, the woman and the driver, and I guess it could have been very humiliating for him, but if that's the case the fault is surely with the woman. Drivers are paid to drive a bus, not police it. £5,500 is an awful lot of money for having to wait a bit longer for a bus.
Drivers are paid to drive a bus, not police it.
How do you make that out? A ridiculous simplification
How do you make that out? A ridiculous simplification
Look at Lord Justice Underhill's comment -- basically he says it was the woman's fault not the driver's or bus company's.
The sign specifically says the the space is reserved for wheelchair users. Therefore enshrined in the bus companys policy. So it should've lost its appeal
[ This image is no longer available. ]
[ This image is no longer available. ]
To Ramruma, obviosuly :-)
Buses and trains have all kinds of things in their policy, not standing forward of this notice, not leaving luggage in the aisle, not eating, not fighting - that doesn't give them legal accountability if someone breaks these policies. Every other week there is a video posted on youtube of someone starting a fight or racially abusing someone on the underground - that's not the train driver's, or company's fault.
Buses and trains have all kinds of things in their policy, not standing forward of this notice, not leaving luggage in the aisle, not eating, not fighting - that doesn't give them legal accountability if someone breaks these policies. Every other week there is a video posted on youtube of someone starting a fight or racially abusing someone on the underground - that's not the train driver's, or company's fault.
So that means I could jump on a bus for free and argue I shouldn't pay because that would be discriminating me against the old fogies with their free buses passes. Expecting the driver to drive on because 'policing' the buses is just not in his remit.
NO!!! in REAL world the fecker would just stop the bus and call in the cops.
NO!!! in REAL world the fecker would just stop the bus and call in the cops.
Well...this kind of WAS the real world and that didn't happen.
If the bus driver HAD call the police I would imagine they would have told him, and quite rightly, to p1ss off. In the unlikely event they had showed up though, all passengers, including the mother and the person in the wheelchair, would have been made late.
If bus drivers were required by law to summon the police every time someone is inconsiderate or rude, the buses would barely move. Sure, she should have moved, but this is not something that merits police or legal action. A letter of complaint perhaps, an apology, maybe a free pass.
If the bus driver HAD call the police I would imagine they would have told him, and quite rightly, to p1ss off. In the unlikely event they had showed up though, all passengers, including the mother and the person in the wheelchair, would have been made late.
If bus drivers were required by law to summon the police every time someone is inconsiderate or rude, the buses would barely move. Sure, she should have moved, but this is not something that merits police or legal action. A letter of complaint perhaps, an apology, maybe a free pass.
What about 'unwritten' rules 
Standing, to give your seat to an older person - yes
Standing, to give your seat to a heavily pregnant woman - yes
Standing, to give your seat to an excessively obese person - no, and make them pay twice the fare for taking up two spaces
Standing, to give your seat to a woman - fack off, they wanted equality, let 'em stand.
Standing, to give your seat to an older person - yes
Standing, to give your seat to a heavily pregnant woman - yes
Standing, to give your seat to an excessively obese person - no, and make them pay twice the fare for taking up two spaces
Standing, to give your seat to a woman - fack off, they wanted equality, let 'em stand.
With apologies for being vaguely serious, the thing about expecting people to make way for others who you would assume would be uncomfortable standing - not really an option for the guy in the wheelchair I imagine - is that they might appear young and healthy, but could easily still have unseen problems. Or of course, they could just be being a dick. Nothing's ever easy!
Case notes if anywon is interested
http://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/sites/default/files/pdf/firstbusjudgment.pdf
http://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/sites/default/files/pdf/firstbusjudgment.pdf
The relevant facts are simply put. On 24th February 2012 the Claimant, who uses a
wheelchair for mobility purposes because he suffers from a neurological condition,
was attempting to board a number 99 bus from Wetherby to Leeds leaving at
9.40am from the bus station; the bus being owned and operated and forming part of the service provided by the Defendant, the bus company. It is the Claimant’s case that he wished to travel on the bus but was unable to do so because the wheelchair
space within the bus was occupied by a lady passenger with a pushchair in which
there was a sleeping child. The driver of the bus, Mr Britcliffe, in accordance with
what was the Defendant’s policy, asked the lady to move (by folding her pushchair)
in order that the Claimant, in his wheelchair, could use the wheelchair space. The
lady refused. Mr Britcliffe did not consider that he could do any more or require the
lady to vacate the space. He informed the Claimant that he would not be able to
travel. The Claimant asked whether it would be possible for him to fold his
wheelchair, store it elsewhere on the bus and sit in one of the ordinary passenger
seats. The driver considered the request but took the view that it would be unsafe
to store the folded wheelchair anywhere on the bus as the route to be taken by the
bus was particularly winding and there was no means by which the wheelchair could
be properly secured. The driver took the view that to accede to the Claimant’s
request would create a potential risk to the safety of his passengers. Accordingly,
Mr Paulley was unable to take that particular bus and, instead, took the later bus,
the 9.56. As a consequence, Mr Paulley missed the train which he was intending to
take from Leeds Station to Stalybridge, where he had arranged to meet his parents
for lunch. Having missed his train, he took a later service arriving an hour later than
he had intended.
wheelchair for mobility purposes because he suffers from a neurological condition,
was attempting to board a number 99 bus from Wetherby to Leeds leaving at
9.40am from the bus station; the bus being owned and operated and forming part of the service provided by the Defendant, the bus company. It is the Claimant’s case that he wished to travel on the bus but was unable to do so because the wheelchair
space within the bus was occupied by a lady passenger with a pushchair in which
there was a sleeping child. The driver of the bus, Mr Britcliffe, in accordance with
what was the Defendant’s policy, asked the lady to move (by folding her pushchair)
in order that the Claimant, in his wheelchair, could use the wheelchair space. The
lady refused. Mr Britcliffe did not consider that he could do any more or require the
lady to vacate the space. He informed the Claimant that he would not be able to
travel. The Claimant asked whether it would be possible for him to fold his
wheelchair, store it elsewhere on the bus and sit in one of the ordinary passenger
seats. The driver considered the request but took the view that it would be unsafe
to store the folded wheelchair anywhere on the bus as the route to be taken by the
bus was particularly winding and there was no means by which the wheelchair could
be properly secured. The driver took the view that to accede to the Claimant’s
request would create a potential risk to the safety of his passengers. Accordingly,
Mr Paulley was unable to take that particular bus and, instead, took the later bus,
the 9.56. As a consequence, Mr Paulley missed the train which he was intending to
take from Leeds Station to Stalybridge, where he had arranged to meet his parents
for lunch. Having missed his train, he took a later service arriving an hour later than
he had intended.
so if unsafe to fold wheelchair
why safe to fold a pram
why safe to fold a pram
Bus was full, wait 15 mins until the next one end of story.
The only thing I don't quite get is the sleeping baby bit.
Was the woman going to stay on the bus until the baby woke up?
If not, she could have just moved the pram a bit to let the wheelchair on.
Was the woman going to stay on the bus until the baby woke up?
If not, she could have just moved the pram a bit to let the wheelchair on.
I don't know why...but I have visions of CMAT frantically searching for some identifying colours or creeds for the main players! 
Only kiddin'.
Only kiddin'.
Was after 9 am and the bus was full....pensioners with bus passes clogging it up the problem 
Our judiciary are terrified of upsetting women in our society
we live in a woman's world
disgustingly selfish behaviour by the woman, and wrong judgement in my opinion
we live in a woman's world
disgustingly selfish behaviour by the woman, and wrong judgement in my opinion
naydam • December 8, 2014 5:44 PM GMT
I don't know why...but I have visions of CMAT frantically searching for some identifying colours or creeds for the main players! LaughLaugh
I don't know why...but I have visions of CMAT frantically searching for some identifying colours or creeds for the main players! LaughLaugh
Clungehungry 08 Dec 14 12:37
I'm sure Toes would have given up his seat. If he hadn't slid off it, because it was sloping.
I can't tell you how many times I've been thrown off those bleedin' sloping seats on First buses just lately!
I had to chase my Vape all the way down to the front of the bus, under someone's feet, when it had been 'sloped' out of my pocket last week!
I'm sure Toes would have given up his seat. If he hadn't slid off it, because it was sloping.
I can't tell you how many times I've been thrown off those bleedin' sloping seats on First buses just lately!
I had to chase my Vape all the way down to the front of the bus, under someone's feet, when it had been 'sloped' out of my pocket last week!
if i wanted to get on a bus with my bicycle and park it in the wheelchair bit , i give it up for no one
Ok, so they pay the guy the five and a half large.
Every bus in Liverpool for the next ten years will be occupied by a woman with a sleeping baby in a pram, waiting for her seemingly disabled accomplice to board.
Every bus in Liverpool for the next ten years will be occupied by a woman with a sleeping baby in a pram, waiting for her seemingly disabled accomplice to board.
I would think revelz and his 'disabled' mate have been waiting for this ruling with bated breath.
I don't understand the drivers rationale. How can it be safe to collapse a buggy and not a wheelchair?
i think the meaning is you can collapse the buggy and stick it in the luggae railings , ive seen some in there before when a buggy is already on the next one has to do this if they want on, but maybe the guy would need more hand in collapsing his 4 wheeler made of steal and getting it in the luggage bit
That would depend on what wheelchair he was using. The wife's collapses probably smaller than most buggies. I've seen his wheelchair I think and it looks like the old one my wife used and it too would have collapsed to a similar size to a buggy and one person could easily do it and quickly.
maybe no seat for him but room for child on mothers arms
he should have just waited for next bus , unless he was in a rush for work etc but he was prob just out cruising
he should have just waited for next bus , unless he was in a rush for work etc but he was prob just out cruising
From the judgement chaser:
The Claimant asked whether it would be possible for him to fold his
wheelchair, store it elsewhere on the bus and sit in one of the ordinary passenger
seats. The driver considered the request but took the view that it would be unsafe
to store the folded wheelchair anywhere on the bus as the route to be taken by the
bus was particularly winding and there was no means by which the wheelchair could
be properly secured.
The Claimant asked whether it would be possible for him to fold his
wheelchair, store it elsewhere on the bus and sit in one of the ordinary passenger
seats. The driver considered the request but took the view that it would be unsafe
to store the folded wheelchair anywhere on the bus as the route to be taken by the
bus was particularly winding and there was no means by which the wheelchair could
be properly secured.
maybe time to start fitting buses out with securing straps
This thread would be more interesting if we had chit chatters offer endings for the thread title (does not have to make sense).
Disabled man kicked off bus when a woman with a pram refused to move because her sleeping baby is so advanced for his age you wouldn't believe what he did yesterday ...
Disabled man kicked off bus when a woman with a pram refused to move because her sleeping baby is so advanced for his age you wouldn't believe what he did yesterday ...
Whilst I have seen many people with walking sticks on a bus I have
never ever seen anyone who had a wheelchair. Surely the vast majority
would qualify for motability car.
never ever seen anyone who had a wheelchair. Surely the vast majority
would qualify for motability car.
not sure how this case ever got to court - waste of money
disabled bloke was in the right ,but should have accepted the women in this case was a tad ignorant .
#
taking the bus-co to court is ridiculous - there are clear signs
disabled bloke was in the right ,but should have accepted the women in this case was a tad ignorant .
#
taking the bus-co to court is ridiculous - there are clear signs
They may Sica but doesn't that presuppose that they can drive?
Surely the vast majority would qualify for motability car.
Quite possibly, although they may not be able to drive or have a driver
Quite possibly, although they may not be able to drive or have a driver
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539