Looking for outside opinion - Free Disabled bus travel with carer

[Resident]

Ok. So to open I'm looking for outside opinions on this. There are discussions taking place within the industry and I'm curious as to a general public view

As it stands there are 2 types of free travel cards for the disabled. Solo and 'with carer'. The Solo card requires you to have one of several disabilities and the 'with carer' also requires higher rate PIP (personal independance payments) & a declaration that you need a carer to aid travel. These travel cards are provided for the recipient and where applicable, the carer to travel for free (travel is funded by the taxpayer instead)

The debate that's being had is down to a hefty increase in the 'with carer' card holders actually travelling on their own, without a carer present and some drivers are questioning whether this should be allowed. The holder has signed the declaration that their disability is severe enough to need assistance, something that drivers are not trained for nor able to provide should the need arise.

So the feeling amongst drivers is that they should be able to refuse 'with carer' card holders when attempting to travel alone as there is a safety issue as assistance cannot be provided.

Personally I agree with those drivers. If they've declared they need assistance when travelling then they should not be travelling alone, when that assistance isn't being provided. If they are able to travel alone then they should have the 'with carer' entitlement withdrawn.

 

[Resident]

What if some days are worse than others and they don't always need a carer? (assuming the disabilities that are eligible can have these phases)

That's part of the debate and I'll answer with the counter that's already been made in the discussions, what if their good day suddenly turns whilst they're on-board and have no-one to help.

In those instances, as it stands now, the bus is taken out of service immediately regardless of other passengers and an ambulance is called because it's considered medical and the driver cannot assist, tying up the vehicle, the driver and an ambulance crew, meaning that later services have to be cancelled at short notice. Cancellation that may not have been needed if the person had their carer to render assistance.

I am fully aware of how chronic illnesses can be on/off, I have been diagnosed with Myalgic encephalomyelitis for the last 7 years.

 

[Resident]

I do see a lot of your points and they're identical to what's been said in the discussions.

For context, initially the debate was opened by the provider of the cards & it's unusual for them to make such a move. Although they've not given a clear motive, it's been suggested that they're looking to cut costs as they pay the bus company everytime the card holder uses the card. They pay more for the +Carer because the presumption is that 2 people are travelling when the card is scanned.

The liability & service disruption angles comes from the drivers/company and I understand why they feel that it's where any reasoning for disallowing travel.

A suggestion has been made by them that ticket machines are altered so that if a +carer card is scanned then it asks the driver if they're actually travelling with a carer or alone to provide a data set.

I assume that they'll most likely use this to track how often a person is travelling alone and if it's over a certain percentage then they'll lose their +carer. For example I do have a frequent passenger on one of my regular routes that has a +carer card and in 6 years I've never seen them board with one.

Disabled people have a difficult enough life as it is. Leave them in peace to get on with their life as best they can. It shouldn't be up to others what a person with a severe disability should or should not be allowed to do. We should all try to help them and make their lives as easy as possible rather than restrict them. Some won't always need a carer, but may need the option for when they do. For example they might be OK for shorter trips. Or maybe their carer isn't available and they really need to get somewhere rather than be shut in at home for days on end.

It's not being suggested that they lose the card entirely, just that if they travel the majority of the time without one then they would be issued a standard solo card.

I would argue that if the carer is only needed occasionally then that comes under a heading of 'additional travel costs' which is one of the components of PIP.

 

[Resident]

I would keep the current system as we don't know if the carer is on an errand for the disabled person. Why should a carer be paying travel fees when they are doing a task for the disabled person.

Ideally there should be a carers card that at the very least should entitled to have free or discounted travel on principle. The unsung hero's keeping our health system afloat.

Carer's cannot travel on a disabled card without the card holder. It's considered fraudulent use and I have, in the past, revoked a pass for this.

I haven’t quite understood the problem.

Disabled person gets free travel card.
Disabled person who qualifies for a carer/has a career applies for the “+carer” version.

Disabled person with valid +carer extension uses transport without a carer.

What is the actual loss suffered by the card issuer in this scenario?

The loss comes from overpaying the bus company. The payments are funded by taxpayer's cash, which is allocated to each Transport Executive. It's a finite resource.

 

[Resident]

How often does this happen?

We've had 3 medical incidents this week, 2 the week before. I can't remember a week where it hasn't happened at least once. Although these are not necessarily a disabled passenger but they're collated as one stat.

The company suffers financial sanctions by the local authority as well as the loss of income from the lost service. Usually, if we have a spare driver & vehicle that knows the routes they will dispatch them to cover until the scheduled one can get back into service. However paying a driver to sit around just in case costs money, as does having a vehicle sat at the depot. Obviously there's a period of time because you can't get the bus to the location instantly.

 

[Resident]

What next have a genetic test on the bus stop others with conditions that could cause the bus to stop. Or stop children on buses because they might fight etc ...

It not their fault they have a disability. We going to stop disabled people from travelling? No, disabled people should get all the help possible, this means even if it is free or costs a company. People should stop, help and wait, but we live in a time were common sense has been lost and almost everyone has become selfish.
This is half of what wrong in this country. If people don't understand then it is ok, they just need to be mindful around disabled people.

Hence the name public transport.

I think you need to go back and re-read the thread. It seems reading comprehension isn't one of your best strengths.

 

[Resident]

So it's a regular and significant occurrence? In that case you are right to be concerned and raise the issue.

We do thousands of journeys each day so some might say it's not significant enough (one of the counter arguements being used). But aside the impact to the company there's also the impact on the other travellers.

What if Rita is on her way to the hospital to see her dying husband?
What if Sue is on her final written at work for being late, has now caught an earlier bus so she doesn't get fired?
What if Bob, who's a carer and on his way to client?

And they all get delayed by someone who needed a carer and travelled without and had an episode


In the county where I work the figures show that almost 80% (78.9% for the pedants) of passengers use an authority issued free pass & has increased year on year for the last 9 (this includes OAPs, there's no separation of those figures available, at least to me). The national average is 32%.

The local authority simply cannot afford it so I get why they're looking at this a cost-saving issue, whilst we, the operators are arguing the health & safety side and service disruption as a greater validity.

No-one is saying that disabled people cannot travel, simply that if they declare they need a carer to travel (in order to secure a +carer pass) then they must have one to travel.

Yes, I understand chronic disabilities, I have one. If there are occasions where I would need a carer to travel with me then the Mobility component of my PIP is there to cover that additional cost.

 

[Resident]

Is this kinda the same argument as I thought they changed the rules or closed the loop hole a while back with something similar when it came to the tax and or insurance on disabled registered vehicles as family members/random people where driving the vehicles and abusing it.


Thats crazy high so at a poor uneducated guess is that tax payers are paying for people to free travel to work for companies and instead of changing the eligibility or part funding etc the card issuer starts complaing/going after the disabled as its an easy target.

There are only 3 free travel passes available in my area

OAP - Paid for by tax payer directly
Disabled (with/without carer) - Paid for by tax payer directly
School - paid for by LEA.

There's also no means testing for Disabled cards, so you could have someone who's completely unable to work and living soley on welfare close to the poverty line and then someone like me, who qualifies for a disabled card but manages to work full-time, is eligible for PIP etc and both would still get a disabled travel pass.

I travel for free anyway as I work in the industry so we have industry agreements. Just wish it applied to air travel

 

[Resident]

What are you waiting for then? 40 hours in a single engine and you're eligible for private jets!

I meant the free travel bit.

Either way, only need 38hrs. Had a 2hr lesson as a 30th birthday present