To think this is a serious error and the resolution doesn’t really cut it

[Myinterestingnewpath]

Visited a well known chain restaurant, early in the week so it wasn’t busy, only about six tables tables taken. I was with my daughter, asked if I could have a table instead of a booth, as I have an assistance dog. My dog is a small/medium size, and was wearing his harness. I got asked if he was a guide dog, I said no an assistance dog. He then asked what that meant. I explained that the dog helps me with tasks that help me live my daily life. He then asked what exactly that meant. So I explained I have neurological damage after breaking my neck, and I can’t feel my fingers so drop things and the dog retrieves them. I also explained I have balance issues, so bending down without falling over is a problem. I then got asked if it was a guide dog again. I said no. He then said you can’t come in because it’s not a guide dog and you’re not blind!! I am not a confrontational person so I just said ok, we’ll just go the restaurant next door, (which is owned by the same group) as they always welcome me. The next day I rang head office and they admitted that what he did is unlawful, and they would do some staff training. Turning away a disabled person because of their equipment is a serious issue. Dogs are classed as auxiliary aids same as wheelchairs. I have been offered £20, I think they’ve got off lightly. What do mumsnetters think?

YABU-restaurants can choose who dines
YANBU-it’s discrimination

I think it was demeaning to point out that you aren't blind & that your dog isn't a guide dog. It undermines your disability & shows a real lack of awareness about disability & discrimination.

The company should be taking it more seriously & I think it's worth politely telling them how you felt when staff queried you openly about your disability, I don't know how you felt but I can imagine it was belittling at best.

If they are going to follow the law then they need to do that

OP you have been given an exceptionally hard time on here with many of the replies I am quite sure folk wouldn’t have said most of it if they met you on the street!
It’s becoming so predictable on here.

What resolution would make you happy?

People keep asking about toileting, I don't know for assistance dogs but for guide dogs, the dog uses a specific place to toilet. If they are out with their owner, they will let their owner know they need to toilet and will guide their owner to a drain or similar to do their business. Guide dogs are highly trained professionals.

I should also add it's unusual for a guide dog to need to toilet when they are working, but of course it happens sometimes.

Yes, I think so too.

I understand why you’d feel aggrieved, going out for a nice meal with your child and repeatedly having to justify your disability. Many responses seem to be showing a lack of empathy, you shouldn’t be put in this position ever. A quick google would have given them the answer if they were unsure. Not good enough, and they have to accept responsibility because the way you were treated is not lawful so they shouldn’t get a gold star for that!

It's definitely a serious error and you deserve better compensation. It's not fair you have to face discrimination when you go for meals & then get fobbed off like that. They shouldn't need an incident like this to implement training, & the staff could have checked properly before refusing

It sounds like other types of working dogs can't be readily identified, and that's a problem, both for the owner and for businesses such as restaurants. I think this is the serious problem that needs to be addressed, not how this one waiter behaved.

This is the crux of it. It’s not a case of having a go at OP, or having a go at the restaurant/waiter. Unfortunately, as it stands there are the following scenarios:

• people with genuine disability with genuinely trained, accredited and registered assistance dogs
• people with genuine disability with helpful pets that they claim are assistance dogs
• people with no disability with pets, who are CF’er’s, and claim they have a disability and that their pet is an assistance dog.

There needs to be a system so only the first scenario is allowed and not the other two. As it currently stands everyone is at a disadvantage. Genuine people because they are hassled to ascertain they are genuine, and places like restaurants because they are not allowed to challenge anyone’s claim of being disabled or to request any paperwork to prove the assistance dog is genuine.

It seems that airlines are able to request paperwork for assistance animals and they need to approve this before allowing them onto plane cabins. However, when anyone else tries this (restaurants, cinemas, shops) it’s unlawful?

There's a young woman with an assistance dog who is actually suing Wetherspoon's over being declined access to one of their pubs. She filmed the whole thing and put it on TikTok and a disability rights group picked it up for her.

I think there should be a mandatory, big enough so it doesn't happen again, fine for companies reported for this. Their staff should know. No excuses. Same as GDPR breaches can be a quite considerable fine, this should be the same.

£20 is an insult and gives no incentive to the brand as a whole to up their game.

Can the charity who supplies your dog also supply a coat for it to wear which explains what it is?

This.

it’s similar to the sunflower lanyard in the sense that it’s overuse and lack of any proper regulation has led to it being abused and those who need it ending up being the ones left suffering.

it needs to have a system similar to what we already have for guide dogs and hearing dogs which can’t be taken advantage of

And by the same token tell me you're completely ignorant about the extent of disability discrimination in this country without telling me. As with any kind of prejudice, you can’t know until you’ve lived it. Why is the prejudice and discrimination experienced by disabled people any less valid than that of any other cohort ?

@Exdonkeylover and @drpet49. No. Not this at all. As has already been well discussed and established further up the thread. It blows my mind how people come on here and confidently assert things that are completely wrong.
From https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/assistance-dogs-a-guide-for-all-businesses.pdf

”Assistance dogs also be owner trained”.

Sounds you would juet like more money.

They apologised and assume will train staff so no one has to go through it again.

Are you not happy with this?

Grabby ???

Read the original post. It’s the minimisation of what actually happened that’s the issue, not the £20 to shut the OP up and make the whole thing go away.

OP I think in your scenario I’d have been so (rightly) outraged that I would never set foot in that establishment again and make sure people in management know that. Fuck whatever meal-token mollification may be offered.

I’m afraid sympathy levels will naturally wain when people think your main point is what you can get out of a bad situation rather than tackling what caused the bad situation in the first place.

And it speaks to how little regard there is for disabled peoples’ rights that the staff member wasn’t trained before he was customer facing.

That’s not what she was saying. She was fobbed off with £20 to make it go away. The money is not the point, it’s the minimisation of what happened - the failure to recognise it as discrimination and treat it seriously.

@DotAndCarryOne2
er this was the first response to ‘what resolution were you hoping for’:

That’s an interesting jump to public flogging. I think the cost of a meal for two would’ve been more appropriate.

so £20 is an insult and minimising but £40 is sufficient recognition that this was a big enough mistake….?????

OP was your dog wearing a jacket displaying the name of the organisation that helped you to train him? (The ones I know of are Canine Partners; Dogs For Good; Medical Detection Dogs…. I’m sure there are others.)

I am currently puppy raising for Guide Dogs. Our foster pup is too small to wear a coat yet but he has a Guide Dogs lead and a big Guide Dogs branded tag on the lead with the Guide Dogs logo stating that he’s a puppy in training. We have been allowed access into everywhere we’ve gone with him, although met a bit of resistance with a woman at the farm shop who didn’t seem to believe me. Fortunately he’s been in previously and her colleagues all trust the Guide Dogs branding!

Our Guide Dogs supervisor advised us that if we are refused entry to anywhere then to tell them and if needed they can intervene. Have you been able to tell the organisation that worked with you about what happened in the restaurant? They could presumably contact the restaurant and advise on proper training so that this doesn’t happen to anyone else.

I’m really sorry that this has happened to you OP. I haven’t seen in the thread though if you’ve said he was wearing a branded coat or harness. Unfortunately, as others have said, anyone can try to waltz in anywhere with a random dog, with or without a random ‘support dog’ harness they’ve bought on Amazon. These are the people causing issues for others who have genuine registered support dogs.

And where did I say it was less valid? Stop comparing them like there's some kind of discrimination hierarchy!

Understandable mistake. Pictoosh has hit the nail I think. I have never heard of an assistance dog, and if you had said it was a sort of guide dog there would have not been a problem, I suspect.
The waiter was just a bit ignorant, and had probably been told no dogs allowed other than guide dogs. He was just obeying instructions and you should not take offence or try and shame the business. I think they responded well with an apology and remuneration.

I am very surprised you have never heard of an 'assistance dog', me109f. It's not a new thing, they have been around for a long time. I've frequently come across assistance dogs in the course of my work.