TfL wheelchair priority

[styles]

The bus company can make it policy that if the buggy isn't folded, or the person refuses to get off the bus and accept a onward travel ticket the bus is so sit stationary until the passenger complies. It shouldn't be up to the driver to decide which persons rights to violate.

Yes, and this is what I've advocated for in this thread.

But it is not the law that they must do this.

And naturally companies try and get away with the bare minimum a lot of the time. It is also sometimes to protect their employees from abuse which, rightly or wrongly, is a common occurrence (and specifically alluded to in the Supreme Court judgement).

It's politicians who need to fix this, especially if wheelchair passengers are to have a UK-wide service they can actually rely on rather than one bus company having one policy and a different bus company having another.

 

[sprunt]

Why is a buggy user selfish? How dare they use a bus for it's intended purpose?

They aren't using that part of the bus for its intended purpose are they? Its intended purpose is to allow wheelchair users to safely travel on the bus, and they are being selfish when they refuse to allow that.

 

[richard13]

Yes, and this is what I've advocated for in this thread.

But it is not the law that they must do this.

And naturally companies try and get away with the bare minimum a lot of the time. It is also sometimes to protect their employees from abuse which, rightly or wrongly, is a common occurrence (and specifically alluded to in the Supreme Court judgement).

It's politicians who need to fix this, especially if wheelchair passengers are to have a UK-wide service they can actually rely on rather than one bus company having one policy and a different bus company having another.

I suspect that small children in buggies are far more common bus users than wheelchair users and both are non-mobile.

A child asleep in a buggy prevents the buggy being folded - waking the child requires both hands and then there is no where on the bus or pavement to put the child down safely while the buggy is folded and the shopping stowed some where. On a bus route with only 4 or 5 journeys a day then several passengers and the driver may well assist in making space available, but on a London bus with a frequent service, it doesn't need to happen.

The legislation may have been written with wheelchair users in mind, but immediately a vastly bigger part of society, who are mobility impaired, has found it invaluable. The law could be changed if it really had to be, to treat the majority users more equally.

Nobody is ever going to be asked to leave the bus mid their journey to priorities one passenger over another; unless for a free taxi directly home which could be very acceptable!

Society in this country has spent £millions in the last 30 years on making it possible for wheelchairs to get about fairly easily in many places. They should be grateful and many are.
Society has not deemed that wheelchair users have absolute priority over toddlers, the elderly or anyone else, anywhere.
Wheelchair users are sitting down and if they have to wait because other mobility restricted users are there first, so be it.
In London that can rarely be a problem and the politicians if pushed are more likely to change the legislation to favour a much wider group of voters.

Posting videos on social media, without a legal name and address, other than to friends will be banned eventually unless through a paid for site taking editorial legal responsibility for the content, just like the printed world, which introduced editorial control a long time ago due to abuse. Facebook and others are currently being sued for exposing children to inappropriate content and if they are found guilty it will change Facebook, etc. fundamentally according to which ever boss said that.

 

[yorkie]

Why is a buggy user selfish? How dare they use a bus for it's intended purpose?

It's first come first served, it's not perfect but nobody has an entitlement to use the space and there's a degree of irony in your last sentence.

That's not correct.

Getting around with your buggy

If you’re travelling in London with a buggy, we want to make public transport easy for you to use. Get to know what to expect when travelling, how to use our maps and guides, and top tips when planning your journey with a buggy.

tfl.gov.uk

All buses have a wheelchair space available. By law, wheelchair users have priority over the space as it is the only place they can travel safely. When a wheelchair user is not using the space, you can use it on a first come first served basis.

If a wheelchair user wishes to board a bus, you should share the space, fold your buggy or move. You will not be asked to leave the bus, but you may choose to do so.

The "first come fist served" basis for buggies applies if the space is not required for a wheelchair user.

 

[AlterEgo]

Everyone is correct but most situations now are risky. Stabbings have also made it not worth worth while asking people to move. Its an easy situation to deal with but from a drivers security point of view cant really do much

A parent with infant is not going to stab you.

 

[styles]

I suspect that small children in buggies are far more common bus users than wheelchair users and both are non-mobile.

A child asleep in a buggy prevents the buggy being folded - waking the child requires both hands and then there is no where on the bus or pavement to put the child down safely while the buggy is folded and the shopping stowed some where. On a bus route with only 4 or 5 journeys a day then several passengers and the driver may well assist in making space available, but on a London bus with a frequent service, it doesn't need to happen.

The legislation may have been written with wheelchair users in mind

I'm going to struggle to say this any other way but, to reiterate what I've mentioned above, the legislation people are imagining here doesn't actually exist.

There is no legal obligation on transport providers to eject people in a wheelchair space in order to make room for a wheelchair, whether those people are standing, sitting, with triples buggies containing three sleeping babies, empty buggies, TVs, or anything else.

The Equality Act 2010 does place a legal obligation to make 'reasonable adjustments'. However the Supreme Court has ruled that a reasonable adjustment is trying to persuade people to leave the space, but it is not necessary to have a policy of forcing people to leave the space if they choose to remain there.

but immediately a vastly bigger part of society, who are mobility impaired, has found it invaluable. The law could be changed if it really had to be, to treat the majority users more equally.

I have to disagree that it is morally acceptable to refuse to let a wheelchair user into a wheelchair space simply because a child is napping. I know parents have it tough and it's hard work but I really don't think this should be prioritised in order to leave a wheelchair user at the roadside when there's space for them to board. I think it's selfish.

Nobody is ever going to be asked to leave the bus mid their journey to priorities one passenger over another; unless for a free taxi directly home which could be very acceptable!

No, and I wouldn't advocate for that. But if there is space on the bus to accommodate the existing passengers and also the wheelchair user then I think it's incredibly selfish, and I would go as far as describing it as ableist, to deny a wheelchair user boarding.

Society in this country has spent £millions in the last 30 years on making it possible for wheelchairs to get about fairly easily in many places. They should be grateful and many are.

I'll try and bite my tongue a bit on this, but I really dislike this wording. The idea that wheelchair users should be grateful for not even being granted the same level of access to public transport as non-wheeled users is, in my view, quite stomach-wrenching.

Society has not deemed that wheelchair users have absolute priority over toddlers, the elderly or anyone else, anywhere.
Wheelchair users are sitting down and if they have to wait because other mobility restricted users are there first, so be it.

The key bit being 'other mobility restricted users'. Obviously if the people occupying the wheelchair space cannot move owing to their restricted mobility then they shouldn't feel any pressure to move. A baby in a pram is not that.

In London that can rarely be a problem and the politicians if pushed are more likely to change the legislation to favour a much wider group of voters.

And indeed, I suspect the only politicians who would take this on would be Sadiq Khan as Mayor of London, who regularly rolls out unpopular policies in order to improve access; and Lilian Greenwood, who is advocating for pavement parking bans in England despite backlash from many motorists who can't fathom not parking their car right outside their front door. If the government tried to change this policy, I can almost guarantee that there'd be a hit piece in the Telegraph about how parents are being forced off buses, even though it wouldn't be true.

Posting videos on social media, without a legal name and address, other than to friends will be banned eventually unless through a paid for site taking editorial legal responsibility for the content, just like the printed world, which introduced editorial control a long time ago due to abuse. Facebook and others are currently being sued for exposing children to inappropriate content and if they are found guilty it will change Facebook, etc. fundamentally according to which ever boss said that.

I'm not sure that exposing content to adult material is quite comparable to a wheelchair user highlighting how TfL aren't following their own rules on wheelchair access on buses.

 

[Mattplans]

That's not correct.

Getting around with your buggy

If you’re travelling in London with a buggy, we want to make public transport easy for you to use. Get to know what to expect when travelling, how to use our maps and guides, and top tips when planning your journey with a buggy.

tfl.gov.uk

The "first come fist served" basis for buggies applies if the space is not required for a wheelchair user.

The point was made that despite it being law, that means nothing if not enforced.

And as mentioned numerous times now, operators are not able to forcibly eject on this basis. And even if they were…

….effectively making it first come, first serve.

 

[Edsmith]

The point was made that despite it being law, that means nothing if not enforced.

And as mentioned numerous times now, operators are not able to forcibly eject on this basis. And even if they were…

….effectively making it first come, first serve.

My point exactly, this law is totally unenforceable.

 

[styles]

My point exactly, this law is totally unenforceable.

Just to reiterate, said law doesn't exist.

 

[mayneway]

I'm going to struggle to say this any other way but, to reiterate what I've mentioned above, the legislation people are imagining here doesn't actually exist.

There is no legal obligation on transport providers to eject people in a wheelchair space in order to make room for a wheelchair, whether those people are standing, sitting, with triples buggies containing three sleeping babies, empty buggies, TVs, or anything else.

The Equality Act 2010 does place a legal obligation to make 'reasonable adjustments'. However the Supreme Court has ruled that a reasonable adjustment is trying to persuade people to leave the space, but it is not necessary to have a policy of forcing people to leave the space if they choose to remain there.

Common sense.
You’re absolutely spot on.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Aug 2026 ==

And as mentioned numerous times now, operators are not able to forcibly eject on this basis. And even if they were…

….effectively making it first come, first serve.

It SHOULD be first come first serve.

It’s just another burden that’s put on drivers to try and resolve, with poor levels of training and no real clarification on what should actually happen.

I just wonder how many drivers have been reprimanded and potently dismissed as a result of these social media posts this lady, along with others continue to film and post.

 

[richard13]

The public I think today treats a buggy as a wheeled chair for infants and some shopping trolleys are specifically a wheeled chair for low mobility adults. Our Local bus often struggles to load all the pensioners with luggage and trolleys - all downstairs seats and tip ups are all used. The drivers will not move off until all the elderly are seated - its not safe for them to stand while moving. Thus trying to clear space for an adult wheelchair at a later stop is just not practical.

The law cannot and does not make it compulsory to clear the space, just a request if possible. A bus driver is in any case not a police officer. Today the law would almost certainly be written differently if the current usage was expected 30 years ago.

What actual difficulty is caused by making a wheelchair user wait - just late like anyone meeting a full bus.
How often are problems encountered in London? How many wheelchair journeys are there per day in London?
Is this a common problem or an occasional one?

I just wonder how many drivers have been reprimanded and potently dismissed as a result of these social media posts this lady, along with others continue to film and post.

I have not seen the videos, but I suspect none, because the videos may not make a legal case for an employment court. The videos may also not be showing the whole situation. If they include faces of individuals, particularly anyone under 18, without their permission, then the poster could be acting illegally anyway.
If wheelchair users want good service from a bus company, then shouting abuse in public at them is likely to produce the opposite effect, as it does in general.
If the videos amount to shouting abuse, then the bus company has the right to ban the person from their buses permanently.

 

[styles]

The law cannot and does not make it compulsory to clear the space, just a request if possible. A bus driver is in any case not a police officer. Today the law would almost certainly be written differently if the current usage was expected 30 years ago.

I don't really follow this logic. A train guard is also not a police officer but they can still mandate people leave the railways. A bus driver is not a police officer but they can also force people to disembark if they're breaking a private company rule. There's no reason bus drivers couldn't be permitted to force people to move out of a wheelchair space when a wheelchair user is needing to board and there remains other capacity on the service for those people to move to. And if you really wanted belts and braces you could even create legislation which explicitly gives powers to move or eject passengers in such situations.

What actual difficulty is caused by making a wheelchair user wait - just late like anyone meeting a full bus.

It's not a full bus though, that's the point. A non-wheelchair user is able to board in the overwhelming majority of these cases. It's only wheelchair users who can't. That's ableist.

If the bus is genuinely completely full then sure, but this is not usually the case.

How often are problems encountered in London? How many wheelchair journeys are there per day in London?
Is this a common problem or an occasional one?

I've never really understood this logic. We know wheelchair users are a small minority. So obviously the tally of such events is going to be small. It's by definition. But glossing over that just because it's a small number is albelist.

I have not seen the videos, but I suspect none, because the videos may not make a legal case for an employment court. The videos may also not be showing the whole situation. If they include faces of individuals, particularly anyone under 18, without their permission, then the poster could be acting illegally anyway.

It's not unlawful to film people in public places, including under-18s. In fact the parameters required for filming to be a criminal offence are quite restrictive in the UK. If it was part of aggravated trespass, yep; if it was sexualised imagery, yep; but filming a bus driver refusing to let you on a bus, nope.

If wheelchair users want good service from a bus company, then shouting abuse in public at them is likely to produce the opposite effect, as it does in general.
If the videos amount to shouting abuse, then the bus company has the right to ban the person from their buses permanently.

That's a lot of ifs for somebody who admits to not having even watched the videos in question.

As for banning passengers, yes, this is possible, however it is worth remembering that if they're being banned because of their disability and the company's failure to make reasonable adjustments for their disability (see First Group v Paulley, Supreme Court, 2017), then this may itself be unlawful. The idea that anybody is even advocating for that is, in my view, quite sickening.

 

[Magrar]

Not moving the bus is surely the logical next "reasonable" step for these poor drivers cowering in their assault proof cabins after their polite and then firm request to fold/move/get off has been ignored.

If they haven't folded/moved/got off after a minute, offer an apologetic shrug to the stranded wheelchair user, and get on with your route. Everyone will be misrable, but nobody will have a black eye or a stab hole. A good day, London wise.

That said, there is an even simpler solution. Mumsnet should sue the TfL over their clearly illogical and unreasonable policy.

How can you offer a wheelchair space to buggy users on a "first come first served" basis, when you already know that it then creates the unreasonable situation of a fare paying passenger being potentially asked to leave the bus short of their destination, just because a wheelchair user wants to get on? If the bus is full and the buggy won't fold, they are under immense social pressure to get off. All because you chose to let them board under this very policy. Unreasonable. Unfair.

In what other realm does an expectation to accomodate a disabled person's rights on equality grounds, override what is effectively an already binding legal contract between an able bodied customer and a service provider? I cannot purchase a disabled space in a stadium or cinema for that very reason.

The fairest solution is to say to drivers, you must never board an un-folded buggy, or any more passengers at all, if the only available spot left is the wheelchair bay. You should treat the bus as if it were full.

Then you can have a legal workaround where an unfolded buggy can be boarded, but only if the person accepts a ticket making it clear their boarding is under a different condition of carriage. Namely, they are legallly obligated to get off if a wheelchair user wants to board. Purchase is acceptance. Their ticket is now void. So while force cannot be used by a driver, their request to leave the bus has contract law behind it.

 

[mayneway]

The public I think today treats a buggy as a wheeled chair for infants and some shopping trolleys are specifically a wheeled chair for low mobility adults. Our Local bus often struggles to load all the pensioners with luggage and trolleys - all downstairs seats and tip ups are all used. The drivers will not move off until all the elderly are seated - its not safe for them to stand while moving. Thus trying to clear space for an adult wheelchair at a later stop is just not practical.

The law cannot and does not make it compulsory to clear the space, just a request if possible. A bus driver is in any case not a police officer. Today the law would almost certainly be written differently if the current usage was expected 30 years ago.

What actual difficulty is caused by making a wheelchair user wait - just late like anyone meeting a full bus.
How often are problems encountered in London? How many wheelchair journeys are there per day in London?
Is this a common problem or an occasional one?


I have not seen the videos, but I suspect none, because the videos may not make a legal case for an employment court. The videos may also not be showing the whole situation. If they include faces of individuals, particularly anyone under 18, without their permission, then the poster could be acting illegally anyway.
If wheelchair users want good service from a bus company, then shouting abuse in public at them is likely to produce the opposite effect, as it does in general.
If the videos amount to shouting abuse, then the bus company has the right to ban the person from their buses permanently.

There’s no abuse from the lady but she makes it clear she campaigns to TFL about the way she’s treated.
I’m pretty sure drivers will be reprimanded when complaints roll in but it’s a case of catch 22. Leave the wheel chair user behind and they complain, potentially insist buggy users move, fold down buggy’s or vacate the bus and they complain.

Ultimately the driver is in the wrong no matter what.

 

[Edsmith]

Just to reiterate, said law doesn't exist.

I've certainly never heard of this 'law' that often gets quoted and the overriding question remains, what is the driver supposed to do if somebody is unable or unwilling to vacate the wheelchair space?

 

[styles]

I've certainly never heard of this 'law' that often gets quoted and the overriding question remains, what is the driver supposed to do if somebody is unable or unwilling to vacate the wheelchair space?

Drive off. As the law currently stands. Unless the operator has created their own policy above and beyond the law which says they should do otherwise.

 

[Falcon1200]

There's no reason bus drivers couldn't be permitted to force people to move out of a wheelchair space

As before, how, if the with-buggy passenger simply refuses to move? The bus driver cannot man (or woman) handle them off the vehicle! The only solution, as mentioned before, seems to be that the bus does not move until they leave of their own accord, but in London (albeit maybe not many other places) this could lead to the silly situation of other vehicles on the same route overtaking the one standing.

 

[styles]

As before, how, if the with-buggy passenger simply refuses to move? The bus driver cannot man (or woman) handle them off the vehicle! The only solution, as mentioned before, seems to be that the bus does not move until they leave of their own accord, but in London (albeit maybe not many other places) this could lead to the silly situation of other vehicles on the same route overtaking the one standing.

The same way they deal with any other passenger who doesn't comply with the rules. That's up to their policy. It could mean holding the bus, calling the police for aggravated trespass, etc - that's up to them.

I don't see why buggy users would be afforded some special right of stay not afforded to someone acting antisocially in any other way.

For the avoidance of doubt by the way, if the bus company did want to "man handle" someone off their bus, yes they are allowed. You are permitted to use reasonable force to remove somebody from private property if they refuse to do so voluntarily when asked. The word 'reasonable' is important of course, but a bus driver can indeed escort somebody off their bus, again, if their company policy permitted. This is very well established in common law.

 

[35B]

The same way they deal with any other passenger who doesn't comply with the rules. That's up to their policy. It could mean holding the bus, calling the police for aggravated trespass, etc - that's up to them.

I don't see why buggy users would be afforded some special right of stay not afforded to someone acting antisocially in any other way.

For the avoidance of doubt by the way, if the bus company did want to "man handle" someone off their bus, yes they are allowed. You are permitted to use reasonable force to remove somebody from private property if they refuse to do so voluntarily when asked. The word 'reasonable' is important of course, but a bus driver can indeed escort somebody off their bus, again, if their company policy permitted.

I’d suggest that we have the double minority problem here. Children in buggies, especially babies, do require their chairs. So, obviously, do those in wheelchairs - and those with walkers or sticks also qualified, legally, as disabled. 2 into 1 may not go.

Setting this up as an either/or risks unnecessary conflict. The wheelchair user does have legal priority, but the focus needs to be on collaborating to get a shared result, not either/or.

 

[Falcon1200]

but a bus driver can indeed escort somebody off their bus,

Escort is one thing, physically moving someone (and of course their buggy and child) off a bus is another thing altogether, given that the offending passenger could be larger and heavier than the bus driver, and their state of mind and possible propensity for violence unknown. I would be astonished if a bus company instructed their drivers to do this, and even more astonished if the drivers and their union agreed to it.

 

[styles]

Escort is one thing, physically moving someone (and of course their buggy and child) off a bus is another thing altogether, given that the offending passenger could be larger and heavier than the bus driver, and their state of mind and possible propensity for violence unknown. I would be astonished if a bus company instructed their drivers to do this, and even more astonished if the drivers and their union agreed to it.

I don't think a bus company would do this, whether it was a buggy pusher or a drunken lout bashing the upper deck ceiling and singing, "Ohhhhh Jeremy Corbyn".

I'm just refuting the point that a driver "cannot" manhandle somebody. In common law, they absolutely can. Their company policy will almost certainly discourage it though.

There's no difference between the drunken lout and the buggy pusher in terms of enforcement, so I don't see it as an excuse to not have a decent wheelchair policy in place.

 

[richard13]

One should not forget the wider scene.

A wheelchair user will be a readily identifiable member of the public. They will be recognised not only by all the local bus drivers, but also by the general public in their area and in these cases also regular passengers, even in London. A wheelchair makes you a lot less anonymous.

They will generate a relationship and reputation with many people, including bus users, in their regular area of life. Anyone appearing in their videos may get to know and not like it.

The wheelchair users personality and reputation will be known to a wider group than they realise. It may well colour the situation.

I'm just refuting the point that a driver "cannot" manhandle somebody. In common law, they absolutely can. Their company policy will almost certainly discourage it though

Just a reminder that common law is not a defined law. It exists only within written law by case study and historical context. Physically removing someone from a bus against their will would be treated as assault, I think, before anything else.

TfL states (https://tfl.gov.uk/transport-accessibility/getting-around-with-your-buggy )
If a wheelchair user wishes to board a bus, you should share the space, fold your buggy or move. You will not be asked to leave the bus, but you may choose to do so.

Being asked to leave a bus mid journey is not a legal requirement and I can't see it ever being so. MPs need votes.
That is the TfL's instruction and you have to live with it.

 

[styles]

Just a reminder that common law is not a defined law. It exists only within written law by case study and historical context. Physically removing someone from a bus against their will would be treated as assault, I think, before anything else.

It wouldn't be, precisely because common law has established that one can use reasonable force to remove a trespasser.

It is not assault.

Of course, for a myriad of other reasons, no bus company will condone this, certainly not for somebody refusing to leave a wheelchair space.

 

[Magrar]

It wouldn't be, precisely because common law has established that one can use reasonable force to remove a trespasser.

It is not assault.

Of course, for a myriad of other reasons, no bus company will condone this, certainly not for somebody refusing to leave a wheelchair space.

The very fact it is not reasonable to use force in any situation where the dispute is such a paltry civil matter, where the offender isn't posing a physical threat of any kind, and where a bus driver is highly likely to have absolutely zero training in the use of controlled aggression, and where he would be embarking on such a thing in the knowledge it could easily result in the person being ejected falling backwards from a step onto a pavement, are all surely the very solid reasons why a court would not see it as reasonable.

 

[richard13]

It wouldn't be, precisely because common law has established that one can use reasonable force to remove a trespasser

They are probably not causing a trespass and in most case of trespass it is a civil offence not a criminal one.
Trespass in law is not what you may think it is. It relates to interference with land, personal property and physical interference with a person, none of which apply here.
The common law only applies to a property owner or occupier and is very restrictive.
The bus is not owned (or occupied in the legal sense) by the driver in London.

I suggest you forget everything about common law - for you and me common law will be just a myth. Written law always replaces common law, which today is almost everything.
Common law only applies where written law does not exist and therefore in very specialised situations, which you are very unlikely to meet.

In none of this has a breach of the current law occurred. Wheelchair users via the driver can request to share the bus floor space, but the driver can take a quick look and determine whether even asking is realistic or just a waste of time and possibly offensive.
The law allows the driver to just drive off.
If the wheelchair user is or becomes abusive as a result then the wheelchair user becomes liable for action against them and the bus company has every right to exclude them from there buses.

Kindness and pleasantness gets far more positive results than anger and abuse.
Beware of self-centeredness.

 

[styles]

They are probably not causing a trespass and in most case of trespass it is a civil offence not a criminal one.

Trespass in most cases starts as a civil matter. But at the point you're asked to leave and you're preventing the owner from conducting lawful business, it becomes aggravated trespass, which is a criminal offence.

It is worth pointing out at this point that you can use reasonable force to remove somebody undertaking civil trespass, as well as criminal trespass.

There is no law preventing a bus driver from removing somebody from their bus. Despite the misinformation in this thread.

Trespass in law is not what you may think it is.

It's exactly what I think it is. I've been in court proceedings over trespass. I have an expert trespass legal firm's contact details in my wallet for protests I attend.

It relates to interference with land, personal property and physical interference with a person, none of which apply here.

They do apply.

The common law only applies to a property owner or occupier and is very restrictive.

It's not as restrictive as you think.

The bus is not owned (or occupied in the legal sense) by the driver in London.

The driver is operating on behalf of the owner.

I suggest you forget everything about common law - for you and me common law will be just a myth.

Common law is a myth? I'm not sure if this is an incredible level of ignorance or sheer determination to make a point you know to be untrue. Common law is law. Statute law is law.

Written law always replaces common law, which today is almost everything.

It actually doesn't, hence various claims to superior courts in the UK and Europe regarding the authority of statute law, but even if it did, there is no law prohibiting a bus driver from removing a passenger, so this is a moot point.

Common law only applies where written law does not exist and therefore in very specialised situations, which you are very unlikely to meet.

Except the literal situation we're talking about.

In none of this has a breach of the current law occurred.

Nobody says it has But you're trying to tell people that you disbelief in common law existing prevents bus drivers removing passengers. It doesn't. Common law actually supports it. It's been ruled on multiple times.

Wheelchair users via the driver can request to share the bus floor space, but the driver can take a quick look and determine whether even asking is realistic or just a waste of time and possibly offensive.
The law allows the driver to just drive off.

Yes, and this is something I believe politicians should change via statute law.

If the wheelchair user is or becomes abusive as a result then the wheelchair user becomes liable for action against them and the bus company has every right to exclude them from there buses.

Yes, although public order offences do have a man on the Clapham omnibus test applied to them. If a wheelchair user is denied access to a bus where space exists for all the current bus occupants and the wheelchair user in the wheelchair space, a few shouty words will not constitute a public order offence. In fact most people would probably see them as quite justified. As for civil action, good luck! Paulley v FirstGroup shows the bus companies much more likely to lose out if they took civil action. And Paulley has a solid track record including just 2 months ago being awarded thousands of pounds in damages.

Kindness and pleasantness gets far more positive results than anger and abuse.
Beware of self-centeredness.

Indeed it does. However when a bus driver doesn't even try and encourage somebody to vacate a wheelchair space in order for a wheelchair user to board, I think it's pretty understandable that said wheelchair user becomes irate, don't you?

 

[Mattplans]

There's no difference between the drunken lout and the buggy pusher in terms of enforcement, so I don't see it as an excuse to not have a decent wheelchair policy in place.

What is your practical suggestion for a policy then?

It doesn't really matter if common law supports it. It simply is not practical for an operator to require their drivers to begin manhandling passengers upon refusal to vacate the space. It certainly is not in the job description, and not something drivers should be expected to do.

 

[styles]

What is your practical suggestion for a policy then?

It doesn't really matter if common law supports it. It simply is not practical for an operator to require their drivers to begin manhandling passengers upon refusal to vacate the space.

My suggestion is for politicians to create primary legislation which requires people to vacate a wheelchair space where they do not require the space for a wheelchair and where the bus has capacity to continue accommodating both them and the wheelchair user trying to board.

Basically if you're stood there, or you've got a bookcase stored there, or you're got a bairn in a pram; and a wheelchair user is trying to board, and you are able to move to make space for them, you should be compelled to do so. It would be even better if the legislation specifically empowered drivers to require people to vacate the space, though it is not actually necessary if the main legislative addition is made.

In the absence of that, I believe bus operators should adopt a policy which is similar to the above. The law permits them to do so. They choose not to because it makes life easier for them. That's all there is to it.

If the wheelchair user can only be accommodated by ejecting passengers from the bus/train/etc, then this should not be required, and the wheelchair user should wait for the next service in the same way a standing passenger would.

The advantage of legislating for this is that drivers wouldn't have to manhandle people - they could simply call the police.

 

[mayneway]

My suggestion is for politicians to create primary legislation which requires people to vacate a wheelchair space where they do not require the space for a wheelchair and where the bus has capacity to continue accommodating both them and the wheelchair user trying to board.

Basically if you're stood there, or you've got a bookcase stored there, or you're got a bairn in a pram; and a wheelchair user is trying to board, and you are able to move to make space for them, you should be compelled to do so. It would be even better if the legislation specifically empowered drivers to require people to vacate the space, though it is not actually necessary if the main legislative addition is made.

In the absence of that, I believe bus operators should adopt a policy which is similar to the above. The law permits them to do so. They choose not to because it makes life easier for them. That's all there is to it.

If the wheelchair user can only be accommodated by ejecting passengers from the bus/train/etc, then this should not be required, and the wheelchair user should wait for the next service in the same way a standing passenger would.

The advantage of legislating for this is that drivers wouldn't have to manhandle people - they could simply call the police.

What do you think happens when someone gets on a bus and refuses to pay? Yes the operator/driver has every right to eject that passenger from the bus and refuse travel.

But let me tell you, very early on in my career working for an operator someone wouldn’t accept their card was declined and went and sat down, I turned off the bus and asked our control team to contact the police as I said someone on the bus who didn’t want to pay, I was told to get back in the cab and drive as the likely hood of the police attending was very slim. Now as frustrating as it is when it happens I just grit my teeth and carry on.
The fact is you can have all the legislation you want the simple answer is you’re never going to be able to police it.

The only fare and reasonable way of dealing with it is to make it first come first serve.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Sunday at 12:33 ==

The advantage of legislating for this is that drivers wouldn't have to manhandle people - they could simply call the police.

Sorry I’ve had to comment on this separately.
I’m not sure where you live or what you do for work, but on two occasions when at work driving a bus I’ve had to call the police, both times I’ve been told they are too busy to attend.

A colleague of mine was seriously assaulted last year while driving his bus, it took police two days to respond and take a statement.

 

[styles]

What do you think happens when someone gets on a bus and refuses to pay? Yes the operator/driver has every right to eject that passenger from the bus and refuse travel.

Correct.

But let me tell you, very early on in my career working for an operator someone wouldn’t accept their card was declined and went and sat down, I turned off the bus and asked our control team to contact the police as I said someone on the bus who didn’t want to pay, I was told to get back in the cab and drive as the likely hood of the police attending was very slim. Now as frustrating as it is when it happens I just grit my teeth and carry on.
The fact is you can have all the legislation you want the simple answer is you’re never going to be able to police it.

Sure, and that's why both legislation and enforcement needs to change.

The only fare and reasonable way of dealing with it is to make it first come first serve.

Fair*

But no, it's not.

Anybody suggesting this is ableist.

Sorry I’ve had to comment on this separately.
I’m not sure where you live or what you do for work, but on two occasions when at work driving a bus I’ve had to call the police, both times I’ve been told they are too busy to attend.

A colleague of mine was seriously assaulted last year while driving his bus, it took police two days to respond and take a statement.

See above about enforcement and policies.