"Ye Canna' Change The Laws Of Physics!"

Sue Hitchings and her husband Robert visited Knowle Post Office in Wells Road on Saturday to pay bills and to buy stamps.

But as they were queuing to be served a staff member approached them and said Mrs Hitchings would have to wait outside because her wheelchair was taking up too much space.

The couple believe Mrs Hitchings was discriminated against because of her disability.

Well, of course they do! However, the postmaster has to consider other things:

But the sub-postmaster who runs the post office has told The Post that banning large electric wheelchairs is not discrimination but a "health and safety issue".

It's quite simple - they can't fit in the shop! Naturally, that doesn't stop the usual disability advocates from demanding the moon on a stick:

Cheri Wilkins, chief executive officer of West of England Centre for Inclusive Living (WECIL), said that in an ideal world everyone with an impairment would have access to all public places and services.

She said the Equality Act 2010 was a positive step towards a reduction in discrimination, but believes there is still a lot more that needs to be done.

"This is a common problem that arises around access for disabled people," she said. "Many people do need to use wider wheelchairs and if a shop aisle is not wide enough, it does exclude them."

Well, Cheri, sweetie, just what are shopkeepers supposed to do? Apply for an exemption from the laws of physics?

You really should have learned at school that two objects can't occupy the same space at the same time...

The sub-postmaster of Knowle Post Office, who refused to give his name to The Post, claims he previously checked with The Post Office Ltd and Bristol City Council that the set-up of his shop was acceptable.

He said the aisles between the Londis convenience store part of the shop and the post office part were wide enough for manual wheelchairs but not wide enough for electric wheelchairs, like the one Mrs Hitchings uses.

He said: "Large electric wheelchairs don't fit down the narrow aisles because they are too wide and there's no turning space for them.

"We go out of our way to help all our customers, especially those with disabilities.

"I have asked many people in electric or motorised wheelchairs to stay outside while we get them what they want, or a family member gets it for them from the post office.

"We have had people in motorised wheelchairs lose control in the past. One customer had his foot run over, another was hit by a wheelchair and once a wheelchair user collided with our lottery machine. It is a health and safety issue.

"I've explained many, many times to many people and normally they don't have a problem. I also informed Post Office Ltd and the city council about it, as we are providing a public service. Neither of them raised any concerns."

It comes down, as it always does, to 'reasonable access'.

Sadly, some people just aren't reasonable! The law should maybe have accounted for that...

Yes, I Do Believe The Children Are Our Future...

...and it's a future that scares me. Maybe there's a reason so many schools are so hung up on tolerating bullies. It's because they can't get any backing to do anything about them.

Not from the education tribunal:

The independent tribunal panel said the school "treated Max unfavourably because of something arising from his disability" in its decision last month.

The exclusion was ruled to be "disproportionate" and the use of the BIC "not appropriate to address or modify Max’s behaviour".

Details of his behaviour? It includes 'swearing, shouting out in class and refusing to obey teachers'.
Which the school dealt with by removing him from class. You know, to prevent any issues for the other children attending school. Does the tribunal give a tuppeny damn about them?

And the reason he was finally excluded? That was for

'refusing to visit the BIC as punishment for an unfounded physical assault allegation against a teacher.'

Yeah. Savour that one.

And certainly they get no backing from parents:

The five-year-old has bitten and punched other children and staff, thrown school equipment and stolen fruit.

On one occasion his entire class was evacuated to protect other pupils.

The last straw came when he kicked a teacher in the face as she bent over his chair.

But his parents claim he is well-behaved at home and say he has been ‘thrown on the scrapheap’ by the school.

‘They said they had to exclude him to ensure the safety of the staff and pupils but I don’t understand how a five-year-old can pose so much of a threat,’ said his father, Cameron, 27, a care home manager.

Volunteers to go round to Cameron's house to throw things, scream, bite, punch and kick him, anyone?

His mother, Laura, 22, a chef from Braintree, Essex, said: ‘Before Logan started school we didn’t know he had this side to him.

'It is like we are talking about two completely different boys. At home he does exactly what he is told and we have never seen him do any of the things the school say he did.

'He really is a clever boy and now that is being wasted.’

He's clever, all right. He knows not to shit on his own doorstep!

Mr and Mrs Steed believe their son should be at a mainstream school where he can socialise with other children.

And if he doesn't feel like 'socialising'? Well, I guess the other kids will just have to put up with it. He's not much of a threat, is he?

Set up a panel, by all means. Talk all you like. But action? Oooooh, no. We draw the line at that.

Oh, So Suddenly ‘Dog On Dog’ Attacks Are A Police Matter?

Or…does it only apply to working dogs?

A guide dog needed emergency treatment and 10 stitches to puncture wounds to his neck after a vicious dog attack.

Hmmm. What sort of dog?

… a white bull terrier type dog lunged and grabbed him by the face and neck.

Ah. What a surprise.

Two builders working nearby intervened to pull the attacking dog off and its owners left the area quickly after a number of passers by became involved.

What a pity the builders didn’t string ‘em up on the scaffolding…

Tony Cook from Guide Dogs said: "This incident clearly illustrates the importance of making sure that dogs are under the control of their owners at all times."

No! Stop generalising! What this incident illustrates is the growing threat of unsuitable owners with no control over their ‘pets’.

Describing the support she received Kane's owner, who wishes to remain anonymous, said: "I'd like to thank the people in Leigh who came to help me and looked after me whilst I was so upset.

Guide dogs have said they have been inundated with people phoning their centre in Atherton asking if Kane and I are ok. "The police are being very supportive and are trying to locate the people with this the dog. I've only had Kane for 8months, before I had him I hardly went out, he has changed my life."

It’s nice to see the police actually taking the view that this is a matter for them.

But why? Why is this not a service available to all? Is it 'special victim' status?

Oh, This’ll Mean War!

Mothers with buggies and tourists with unwieldy suitcases are to be targeted in a new campaign to give wheelchair users priority on buses.

INCOMING!!!!

Just imagine the fury of the mums with their giant buggies? It’ll be awesome to behold as they are told they aren't a priority. The tourists will just shrug and say ‘Que?’…

Bus drivers will use their PA system to ask other passengers to move aside — and will not be allowed to drive off until they have done so.

The wording’s ambiguous – will not be able to drive off until the passengers have moved accordingly?

Or will not be able to drive off until they've ticked a box by asking, no matter what the response is..?

TfL officials said that the dedicated space, usually in the middle of the bus, was the only place where wheelchairs can travel safely.

They pointed out that on most buses there is room for both a wheelchair and suitcases or a single buggy in the reserved area. But where there was not, the buggy would have to be folded and suitcases moved to storage racks.

I can’t wait for this policy to provoke more BusRage amongst London’s vibrant population…

One Londoner said passengers made her feel uncomfortable when she used the allocated wheelchair space. Zara Todd, a youth worker from Merton, said: “People make you feel guilty for having to ask them to fold their buggies. Drivers find it awkward to ask them because of the fuss that it can cause.

“They think they are entitled to have the buggy unfolded. I understand that it can be time-consuming but I can’t fold my wheelchair. I have no choice.”

Good luck with expecting the unreasonable to suddenly become reasonable because there’s a poster up, love.

Activists Aren’t Like Other People…

Dr Paul Jarman, 45, claims he cannot allow his guide dog Gemma off her lead due to stringent dog control orders insisted upon by his local authority, Newark and Sherwood District Council.

And, as he has a disability, this is a personal affront to him and all other people with disabilities, and don’t you forget it!

He says the way the legislation is implemented is discriminatory, with no exemptions or concessions for the fact the Labrador is a registered guide dog and needs to be exercised.

ALL dogs ‘need to be exercised’, just just guide dogs. Apart from their training, there’s nothing special about them…

He said it was “without question, the most anti-disabled piece of legislation to have made it onto the statute books for many years, and it is no exaggeration to suggest that, if other local authorities were to follow NSDC's example, all possibility of independent and responsible guide dog ownership in the UK would be at an end”.

Really? Are you sure you haven’t gone a little too far with the hyperbole there?

No..?

Oh, OK then:

Dr Jarman, a disability support officer at Queen Mary, University of London, added he feared it may force blind people out of the area, saying: “Most of my walks are accompanied by the close attentions of NSDC's dog wardens, who evidently have nothing better to do than harass and threaten guide dog owners - a sad state of affairs.”

*sigh*

This is because his borough has chosen not to exempt guide dogs. Others have, and there’s nothing whatsoever to indicate that maybe they might not reconsider if enough people complain, but then, if you are a ‘disability campaigner’, it seems your job is to whip up fear and anxiety in the people you are campaigning for…

Other local authorities, including Manchester City Council and Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council, have explicitly made blind people with guide dogs and disabled people with trained assistance dogs exempt from the control orders.

So, rather than predict Armageddon for guide dogs everywhere, why not simply and calmly request that your borough takes note of others’ policies and looks again at its own?

Or are you just one of the professional Awkward Brigade?

A spokesman for Newark and Sherwood District Council said Dr Jarman chose to walk his dog in an area where they must be kept on leads as a result of a spate of attacks, and that there were alternative open, grassed areas nearby.

Jeremy Hutchinson, Environmental Health assistant manager, said officers would advise any blind member of the public of the law if it was clear they could not read warning signs.

“However, if they were to persist in doing so, despite knowing the order was in force, we would be likely to treat them as any other offender and issue a fixed-penalty notice,” he said.

Fancy that! Being treated just like anyone else!

Remember when that was what the disabled claimed to want..?

Oh, Here We Are Again!

The incident happened after Marina Bradbury, aged 31, of Glascote Heath, entered Crossfell Stores with her two-year old black Labrador/Retriever cross Spyder.

Marina, who has retinitis pigmentosa, an inherited eye disease, said she was told to leave the shop by store owner Albert Lalli.

Yup, it’s one of those, albeit without a ‘Religion of Peace’ aspect, seemingly.

"I explained to him that Spyder was a guide dog and by law I was allowed to have her in the shop with me. But he continued to ask me to leave. "I was annoyed and felt embarrassed, so walked out."

And what does the shopkeeper have to say for himself?

Well, denial that any such discussion took place. And ignorance of the law is always a good ploy, don’t you think?

When approached by the Herald, Mr Lalli said: "When I asked her to leave the store, she didn't say anything to me and left straight away. If she was upset by this, I would have spoken to her.

"I was concerned that the dog would lick the fresh fruit and veg.

"I hadn't seen a guide dog in our shop before this. I felt I wasn't doing anything wrong."

Of course you hadn’t! Of course you didn’t!

But after being informed of laws that allow owners of guide dogs to enter shops with their animals, Mr Lalli said he wasn't aware of these rules and would allow Mrs Bradbury and Spyder back in to his store.

He added: "As long as the dog is responsible, they are welcome back."

No, you still don’t quite get it, do you – they are allowed back by law whatever you think of the dog…

Colin Elliot, mobility team manager for the Guide Dogs charity, said he would contact Mr Lalli. He said: "The Equality Act 2010 makes it illegal to deny access to a guide dog owner."

Colin, you’d do better to pop along to the council’s health and safety and trading standards departments and tell they that there’s a store that’s ignorant of the law on this, so might well be ignorant of the laws on a whole stack of other things, too.

When it starts to affect these people financially, they might start to actually pay some attention to the law.

Ah, I See The Problem Here - Too Little Petrol...

...or possibly, no ignition source:

Frank Phillips, representing Morgan, said he was “sorry for what happened” but acted out of paranoia after himself being a victim of an attack.

He said his client had previously been involved in an attack where petrol was thrown over him.

“When he went into this restaurant he thought the complainant’s partner had looked at him in a strange way. Clearly he misunderstood the situation,” said Mr Phillips.

Oh. You think?

“It escalated from there. That’s an explanation but it’s not put forward as an excuse,” said Mr Phillips.

*chuckles* Yeah. Sure it isn't...

Judge Keith Thomas, sitting at Swansea Crown Court, said he had acted without “any reason or provocation”.

“It was a disgraceful attack on a lady who is disabled,” he added.

“You have a quite dreadful record for violence and public order matters, particularly in the last couple of years.”

“You rarely go out, but it seems when you have, you have caused trouble,” he added.

He then jailed Morgan for 10 weeks.

So he'll serve...half?

An End To Compo Culture At Last?

Mrs Fari said she was due £740,000 for an injury so severe she needed on-going care. The judge said the figure was nearer £1,500 for a minor injury that would cause her three months’ discomfort.

Ouch! It gets worse…

Undercover surveillance was carried out and it was discovered that Ms Fari had a pre-existing deformity in her knee. The judge was so angry she now faces the prospect of prosecution for contempt of court and a prison sentence.

This is because of a recent landmark case, which – hopefully – could well spell the end to the notorious compo culture:

Judge Christopher Mitchell struck out her entire claim for damages at Central London county court so she will not get a penny. He said she had attempted to deceive his court by wildly overstating the suffering caused and that the scale of exaggeration involved in her claim amounted to an abuse of process.

He has referred the case to the High Court which may allow contempt of court proceedings to be brought against Ms Fari.

And, if the defendant’s lawyers have anything to say about it, that’s just the start:

Jennifer Harris, a solicitor at Plexus Law who represented Homes for Haringey, said the judge’s verdict should be a warning to other potential fraudsters seeking to make exaggerated compensation claims.

She said: “This is a significant success in the fight against fraudulent and exaggerated claims and sends a strong message that genuinely injured claimants and their representatives should not attempt to exaggerate the extent of injuries.

“This is one of the first cases to follow the principles established in Summers v Fairclough Homes and confirms that a grossly exaggerated claim can amount to an abuse of process significant enough to warrant striking out in its entirety a claimant’s case.”

Of course, there’s outrage on the part of the claimant, strangely only articulated by her mother. Perhaps she herself is a bit too busy with her huge brood to comment...

Ms Fari’s mother defended her daughter, telling the Standard she had told the truth about the extent of her injuries.

Speaking at the family home in Haringey she said: “My daughter told the truth in court and was made to look a liar. It is disgusting, there has been no justice, she does not deserve this.”

If not her, who?

Ms Fari has 21 days to appeal against the judge’s decision. If she fails to do so, or if her appeal fails, the Attorney General can opt to prosecute her for contempt of court.

If he decides not to, lawyers for Homes for Haringey are expected to bring their own High Court action.

*orders popcorn*