Blue badge (1 Viewer)

[Charlie]

I can go into the shop on Steves behalf provided he is in the car. I cannot go buy a dress for myself. If I was visiting him in hospital I can't use the Blue Badge, but if I am going to pick him up I can use the Blue Badge. Basically if it is of benefit to the person issued with the BB it's ok.

Spot on correct that is

 

[irnbru]

I can go into the shop on Steves behalf provided he is in the car. I cannot go buy a dress for myself.

I dont read it like this.
If you are not disabled and the disabled person is not leaving the car then why would you have to take up a disabled place to begin with? Surely you could leave it for a disabled person that might want to park up and get out the car.

 

[SuperMike]

"You should not use the badge to allow non-disabled people to take advantage of the benefits while you sit in the car."
That is how I would read it.

Thank you for that, but that is a very grey and ambiguous sentence and IMO, in the example I describe, unenforceable.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Cat53]

Actually I think you may be wrong about that! I've just been reading the pdf below:



It clearly says:

Do not allow other people to use the badge to do something on your behalf, such as shopping or collecting something for you.
• You must never give the badge to friends or family to allow them to park for free, even if they are visiting you.

You should not use the badge to allow non-disabled people to take advantage of the benefits while you sit in the car.
• It is a criminal offence to misuse a badge. This includes people other than the badge holder taking advantage of the parking concessions provided under the scheme.​

My interpretation of the above is that if the disabled person does NOT at any point need to enter or exit the vehicle, ie they just stay in it whilst it is parked up, you CANNOT use the blue badge for parking.

It is a 'mobility aid' ONLY for the person it is provided for - if that person has no intention of getting 'mobile', so will just wait for you in the vehicle, you, as the able-bodied person are NOT entitled to use it - there is nothing to prevent YOU from parking in a normal parking bay for example and walking to/from it.

Now you see our interpretation is...he cannot give me his Blue Badge to go shopping with, even if it's to get his prescription, because he is not using the car at all in that situation. Because it says you must never give the badge to another person and that's what you are doing.

And the second part is him driving and using the car to take me shopping for me. That's a no, no!

 

[Charlie]

I dont read it like this.
If you are not disabled and the disabled person is not leaving the car then why would you have to take up a disabled place to begin with? Surely you could leave it for a disabled person that might want to park up and get out the car.

The car may be parked in a disabled bay if.. The disabled person is present. If the person is being dropped off. In this case the car may be left in the bay if for instance the person is in a doctors appointment or any other place if they are returning to the car. Or if the person is is being picked up.

A family member cannot park in a bay if for instance they are collecting medication for the disabled person. That family member if able bodied them selves do not need nor have no rights or permissions to use that bay for that purpose.

Abusing the privilege of having a blue badge can result in it being withdrawn. Even if its not the disabled/entitled person doing it .

 

[Judge Mental]

When at the CAB most of the work was related to appeals on some benefit or other. The lions share I was involved in were successful.

The whole system is flawed. Its down to decision makers who frankly have absolutely no idea what they are doing....

Example. How can a person with NO medical training say a person it fit and well and/or able bodied enough to work when the Doctor or Specialist consultant say they are not ?

The bodies who deal with these forms and decide have an agenda. That agenda is to reject claims and fire people off benefits. When I was at CAB it was ATOS. That has I believe changed now or is about to be.

Any person who is on DLA that has not had to migrate over to PIP will have to be doing so in the not to distant future.

The PIP requirements are quite a bit different and way way tougher ! So unfortunately many will loose the benefit. The decision is like above dictated to by the agenda. That agenda is again to fire people off DLA and therefore save the government money.

My advice for what its worth is IF anyone is fired off appeal immediately.

Doing the job in the CAB was ultra ultra stressful. Mainly because when sat the other side of a desk from some idiot who was clearly not entitled but refused to accept it was extremely difficult ! Helping the genuine was an pleasure and rewarding. Please consider volunteers do the work for nothing. But its was not and nearly never is about money. The reward from actually making a difference was immense. Sadly some take it home and take each case personally. Not an easy job ...

One last thing. Each appeal costs the government a huge amount of money. Often far more than allowing people to claim and be paid. Stunningly ridiculous ! . But they have an agenda to work to and stupid as it is that's what they do.

I managed both appeals on my own and it was stressful. Especially when you saw others in court surrounded by legal representation...

like you say this PIP situation more difficult. But when as a 40% tax payer, you get sod all benefits due to savings. I don't think it's to much to expect at 63 some support as I will not reach pensionanable age in all likelihood..

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Cat53]

I dont read it like this.
If you are not disabled and the disabled person is not leaving the car then why would you have to take up a disabled place to begin with? Surely you could leave it for a disabled person that might want to park up and get out the car.

If it's at Asda or somewhere we don't take up a disabled space if I am popping out on his behalf, but it does mean We can park on double yellows ( providing we are not causing an obstruction) to get his prescription filled. Basically, he cannot do it on his own, so I become his legs.

As for disabled parking in general, we feel there should be two categories of parking bays. One a normal car space nearest the shops for those who cannot walk far, and wider bays further away from the shop entrance, for those who need to open their doors wide to access wheelchairs etc.

 

[Just smiffy]

I dont read it like this.
If you are not disabled and the disabled person is not leaving the car then why would you have to take up a disabled place to begin with? Surely you could leave it for a disabled person that might want to park up and get out the car.

Yup...! Many times waiting for a space while disabled person sitting in the car while the other half is doing the shopping ...! Any space is good for that... I wait for a space or park on an end space so leaves my passenger door free to get my wheelchair in or out....

My other half won't let me park in bays if she is just going in regardless if what she's getting is for me or her...

 

[Cat53]

I dont read it like this.
If you are not disabled and the disabled person is not leaving the car then why would you have to take up a disabled place to begin with? Surely you could leave it for a disabled person that might want to park up and get out the car.

Totally agree, but it's not just used in disabled parking bays, it's useful to get his prescription filled, for example. It was useful to drop his watch into the jewellers. Get his glass lens refitted at the optiticians when he lost the screw. Those sorts of things. And it's perfectly acceptable re the Blue Badge

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Minxy]

Now you see our interpretation is...he cannot give me his Blue Badge to go shopping with, even if it's to get his prescription, because he is not using the car at all in that situation. Because it says you must never give the badge to another person and that's what you are doing.

And the second part is him driving and using the car to take me shopping for me. That's a no, no!

I don't think so ...

You should not use the badge to allow non-disabled people to take advantage of the benefits while you sit in the car.

It doesn't definine whether the blue badge holder is the driver or passenger as it doesn't make any difference - it simply states that the non-disabled person cannot make use of the benefit.

For example: the BB holder and an able-bodied person are in a car, however only the able-bodied person is intending to get out (to run an errand on behalf of the BB holder) and the BB holder is going to remain in the car, they are therefore NOT permitted to 'use' the 'benefit' of parking in a disabled parking bay. The able-bodied person has no need to use a disabled bay at all so should use a standard bay.

 

[Minxy]

Totally agree, but it's not just used in disabled parking bays, it's useful to get his prescription filled, for example. It was useful to drop his watch into the jewellers. Get his glass lens refitted at the optiticians when he lost the screw. Those sorts of things. And it's perfectly acceptable re the Blue Badge

Can you please tell me how this is 'acceptable' ref the BB scheme? IMV it is still an 'abuse' of the benefit - it is YOU who is benefiting from not having to walk far, not the disabled person who the BB is for.

 

[Cat53]

I don't think so ...


It doesn't definite whether the blue badge holder is the driver or passenger as it doesn't make any difference - it simply states that the non-disabled person cannot make use of the benefit.

For example: the BB holder and an able-bodied person are in a car, however only the able-bodied person is intending to get out (to run an errand on behalf of the BB holder) and the BB holder is going to remain in the car, they are therefore NOT permitted to 'use' the 'benefit' of parking in a disabled parking bay. The able-bodied person has no need to use a disabled bay at all so should use a standard bay.

Let me make it clear...we do NOT use disabled parking bays if only I am getting out of the car, but we have used the BB to park elsewhere and I have run an errand on Steves behalf.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[SuperMike]

I think @Minxy Girl that like a lot of things it's what is right or wrong, but what is reasonable. In the example I described, the car would be stationary for a lot longer, getting Management out etc. than just popping into the bank. Having worked in Parking and Enforcement for some 11 years I would expect the PEO to use his head. And, let us not get into Officers being thick, on commission and all the other rubbish. All that I worked with were a decent bunch of people, just doing a job.

 

[Minxy]

Let me make it clear...we do NOT use disabled parking bays if only I am getting out of the car, but we have used the BB to park elsewhere and I have run an errand on Steves behalf.

That was just an example, I wasn't inferring that you would abuse disabled parking bays ... forget car parking bays, but using it on yellow lines is still an abuse of the benefit ... sorry, but it is!

 

[Khizzie]

I dont read it like this.
If you are not disabled and the disabled person is not leaving the car then why would you have to take up a disabled place to begin with? Surely you could leave it for a disabled person that might want to park up and get out the car.

I agree with you on that @irnbru.. ..also it must be noted that in many car parks the blue badge covers free parking anywhere.,s if you are one of those that is needing financial assistance ,you get it free .Roy

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Minxy]

I think @Minxy Girl that like a lot of things it's what is right or wrong, but what is reasonable. In the example I described, the car would be stationary for a lot longer, getting Management out etc. than just popping into the bank. Having worked in Parking and Enforcement for some 11 years I would expect the PEO to use his head.

I agree however there is no need for the disabled person to get out, just the person running the errand ... they should NOT therefore use the badge to park on double yellow lines as THEY don't need the benefit of not having to walk so far.

 

[Cat53]

Can you please tell me how this is 'acceptable' ref the BB scheme? IMV it is still an 'abuse' of the benefit - it is YOU who is benefiting from not having to walk far, not the disabled person who the BB is for.

Why am I benefitting? I don't want to do the bloody errand. I am only doing it because he can't. I would rather be at home doing my own jobs! It's not because I enjoy being his carer....I am literally doing it on his behalf, for his benefit. If he wasn't disabled I wouldn't need to do it. He could go himself. Explain to me how he is supposed to access offices up a flight of steps with no ramp and he's in a wheelchair. So you think we should park up, I get his wheelchair out, push him to the office entrance, he sits outside in the snow, sleet, hail, whilst I run up the steps and access whatever or whoever is required or drop off the letter. We then reverse the process. The entire farce takes twenty minutes or more, or alternatively, I leap out and do it for him. Takes five mins and I am the only one who gets wet. Thanks. Some benefit for me that is. ... Of great benefit to him though. Hence why it's ok to use the BB in that way!

 

[Charlie]

I managed both appeals on my own and it was stressful. Especially when you saw others in court surrounded by legal representation...

like you say this PIP situation more difficult. But when as a 40% tax payer, you get sod all benefits due to savings. I don't think it's to much to expect at 63 some support as I will not reach pensionanable age in all likelihood..

Judge the problem is most if not all CAB offices are completely snowed under with cases and appeals. They can't cope it's as simple as that. So many people go it alone .

You have to bear in mind it's a judgement call when accepting to help someone. It's very hard to take on a case where there is little or no chance of a good outcome. Harder still when the appellant is a complete tosser with nowt wrong with them.

Nevertheless I strongly advise getting assistance if at all possible.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Minxy]

Why am I benefitting? I don't want to do the bloody errand. I am only doing it because he can't. I would rather be at home doing my own jobs! It's not because I enjoy being his carer....I am literally doing it on his behalf, for his benefit. If he wasn't disabled I wouldn't need to do it. He could go himself. Explain to me how he is supposed to access offices up a flight of steps with no ramp and he's in a wheelchair. So you think we should park up, I get his wheelchair out, push him to the office entrance, he sits outside in the snow, sleet, hail, whilst I run up the steps and access whatever or whoever is required or drop off the letter. We then reverse the process. The entire farce takes twenty minutes or more, or alternatively, I leap out and do it for him. Takes five mins and I am the only one who gets wet. Thanks. Some benefit for me that is. ... Of great benefit to him though. Hence why it's ok to use the BB in that way!

Why when things like this are brought up do people assume that the 'only' solution' is for the disabled person to then exit the vehicle ... they don't have to ... instead the person who is running the errand should park in a standard way and NOT use the BB benefit ... if the BB holder didn't need the BB this is what they'd do anyway!

It is no different to NOT having the BB holder in the vehicle ... the ONLY time the BB should be used is if the BB holder is going to get in or out of the vehicle, not for any other reason!

 

[SuperMike]

I agree however there is no need for the disabled person to get out, just the person running the errand ... they should NOT therefore use the badge to park on double yellow lines as THEY don't need the benefit of not having to walk so far.

I see your argument, but again what, in each particular case is necessary. How far away do I have to park to get away from the yellow lines. Five minutes, ten minutes etc. Sorry, I would not leave Management in the car on her own for any period of such time, because of her condition. Having parked outside the bank, if I did not get reasonably fast access to a teller or machine, I would walk out, to get back to her. So no one rule fits all, which makes enforcement almost impossible.

 

[Minxy]

It is no different to NOT having the BB holder in the vehicle ... the ONL

I see your argument, but again what, in each particular case is necessary. How far away do I have to park to get away from the yellow lines. Five minutes, ten minutes etc. Sorry, I would not leave Management in the car on her own for any period of such time, because of her condition. Having parked outside the bank, if I did not get reasonably fast access to a teller or machine, I would walk out, to get back to her. So no one rule fits all, which makes enforcement almost impossible.

Thank you Mike, at least someone gets it! I'm not saying people shouldn't do what they see fit for their particular circumstance, but arguing that the BB scheme actually allows the benefit to be used run errands without the disabled person exiting the vehicle is wrong and could catch some people out and I wouldn't want them to end up with a ticket if they are 'challenged' by a traffic warden.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Cat53]

Why when things like this are brought up do people assume that the 'only' solution' is for the disabled person to then exit the vehicle ... they don't have to ... instead the person who is running the errand should park in a standard way and NOT use the BB benefit ... if the BB holder didn't need the BB this is what they'd do anyway!

It is no different to NOT having the BB holder in the vehicle ... the ONLY time the BB should be used is if the BB holder is going to get in or out of the vehicle, not for any other reason!

But if it wasn't for the disabled person you wouldn't be doing it in the first place. You are only doing it because of them. It is benefitting them. And therefore the blue badge can be used. You may not like it, but it is acceptable.

 

[rupert]

there are none so blind as those who WILL not see

 

[Minxy]

Cat ... if you didn't have your other half with you and needed to run an errand ... would you use the badge or not?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Cat53]

It's a minefield for sure. The time I felt most guilty for using the BB was parking in a disabled bay at the hospital on my way to collect Steve when he was being discharged. Perfectly acceptable, but felt wrong.

 

[Cat53]

Cat ... if you didn't have your other half with you and needed to run an errand ... would you use the badge or not?

NOT. it's not my badge. If he was with me and I needed to run an errand for me, I wouldn't use it.
He uses it if I have to run an errand for him.

 

[Minxy]

Cat ... if you didn't have your other half with you and needed to run an errand ... would you use the badge or not?

It's a minefield for sure. The time I felt most guilty for using the BB was parking in a disabled bay at the hospital on my way to collect Steve when he was being discharged. Perfectly acceptable, but felt wrong.

That's not the same as what I've asked ... you were going to collect him and he therefore needed to have the vehicle in a disabled bay ready for him, that's totally how it's meant to be. However, if you went on an errand for him, eg to pick up a prescription, without him being in the car and then went back home again ... would you use the BB?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Charlie]

I can't see the problem. If the disabled person is in the car why can they not sit there while a carer does the shopping for them. It could be the disabled person just likes going along for the ride. Why not ? Because a person has mobility or disability getting out and about is not only a good idea it is in my opinion necessary !

I actually think it's irrelevant who the shopping is for. The important and realtime thing is that person needs to and should get out at every given opportunity.
seeing it as bending the rules or abuse is at best splitting hairs.

Live and let live friends it costs nothing .

 

[irnbru]

He uses it if I have to run an errand for him.

And you cant run the same errand by parking in a nirmal space?
The badge is for the mobility of the holder only.

 

[irnbru]

I can't see the problem. If the disabled person is in the car why can they not sit there while a carer does the shopping for them. It could be the disabled person just likes going along for the ride.

And they cant do this by parking in a normal place?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}