Taxi Driver Online

Nothing particularly out of the ordinary here as regards this kind of thing. But the council's response has a few holes in it, if you ask me...

Never heard of a 'teacup' dog before, but apparently they're bred to be as small as possible

Which, of course, can just about be worked out without actually looking it up.


Disabled man refused taxi because he had assistance dog

https://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/2 ... tance-dog/

A disabled man who collapsed through exhaustion was left "devastated and humiliated" after he was refused a taxi because he had an assistance dog.

Edward Jones, 46, says he was ignored by taxi drivers outside Chippenham railway station on two occasions.

He was told he would not be driven home because of his dog, George, a two-year-old Teacup Shih Tzu who helps him with his mental health.

This was despite him collapsing and experiencing a pain in his legs he described as a “burning from the inside out".

Wiltshire Council has changed its guidelines for taxi drivers in response to the incident.

Councillor Caroline Thomas, cabinet member for transport, said: “We were sorry to hear about Mr Jones’ experience at Chippenham railway station.

“As we have previously stated, the council takes these matters very seriously.

“After investigating his complaint, we have revised the wording in our taxi guidelines to make it absolutely clear to taxi drivers that guide dogs and assistance dogs must be carried, and it is illegal to refuse to do so.

“In addition, customers who state that their dog is an assistance dog are under no legal obligation to prove this, meaning that any dog classed as an assistance dog must be carried, unless the driver has a medical exemption from carrying dogs.

“Our enforcement officers will be undertaking rank inspections to monitor compliance.”

Mr Jones described himself as feeling “joy and relief” when he was told of the changes.

He said: “Both Wiltshire and Chippenham councillors with whom I dealt on this matter have been wonderful and very supportive, I do want to thank them for their understanding.”

He added: “My hope is that with this change and by publishing this update, others across the Shire in similar situations will definitely know their rights, and feel secure and comfortable travelling anywhere, just as an able-bodied person would do.”

Mr Jones recently moved from London to Chippenham and is registered disabled due to a long-term chronic illness which greatly affects his mobility.

He said the effect that his assistance dog had on his mental health had “saved his life".

The Equality Act 2010 states taxis must carry guide dogs and other assistance dogs.

Ah, so it was all the council's fault, then? But the way Mr Jones lavishes praise on the council and councillors makes it sound like they've ridden to the rescue, rather than just not getting it right in the first place.

On the other hand, wouldn't be surprised if the guidelines were adequate all along, and this is all a PR exercise...


So this means anyone can just claim their canine is an assistance dog and that's the end of the matter? Imagine if this kind of things was applied more widely...

How precisely is an 'assistance dog' defined? It's certainly not clear above, other than that he claims he needs it for mental health reasons...

Also, the councillor's second point doesn't really follow from the first, and doesn't make sense (a non-sequitur ).

On the other hand, if anyone can self-certify their mutt as an assistance dog, then it's surely more accurate to say that any dog at all must be carried?

But given the way this is worded, it's perhaps no surprise their original wording in the guidelines was causing problems.


They're going to have to spend an awful lot of times inspecting the ranks to make much difference, I'd guess. And presumably not WFH...

time for a sample purchase operation perchance ?

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

I'm not impressed by this.

Drivers can only refuse if they have good reason, how can they assess good reason without asking?

_________________
IDFIMH

To be fair, I assume they're allowed to ask. But if the customer says, yes, it is an assistance dog, there's no way the driver can question it.

So someone with some huge, slavery, hairy, incontinent, angry dog who normally can't get a taxi just has to say it's an assistance dog and the driver can't question it

No point reading this again if you've read Sussex's earlier post from last night. But this is the BBC's version of the same piece in which, as is often the case with these shared LDRS things, the only difference here seems to be the headline.

So this emphasises the guide/assistance dog angle, and the supposedly 'clear' guidelines.

That'll be the guidelines which say you effectively have to take any dog, because zero proof is required that's it's a guide/assistance dog




Taxi driver suspended over guide dog refusal

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7vz97zrd24o

A taxi driver was suspended after he refused to take a guide dog, despite "clear" council guidelines.

I presume in the latest incident it was an actual guide dog which is covered by legislation whereas the assistance dog in the first article was not

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector