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

Service dog users are not required by law to carry ID

https://www.assistancedogs.org.uk/the-law/

I don’t think their resolution is fair. They broke the law by refusing to seat and serve you in the restaurant. Unless there is a valid reason not to (dog allergy) they cannot discriminate.

i am likewise confused about the growth of "assistance dogs" when the role of the dog is to pick something off the floor in a restaurant??as someone else said if you are taking the dog out on your own how do you pick up your dogs poo??? if you are walking and mobile how does this dog help with your balance...your problems suggest you wouldn't be able to go out without assistance? if you are with someone else can't they pick stuff off the floor when you go out?? is your dog a registered assistance dog?

I emphasised the need for the company to be taking steps to ensure effective training because if it were happening every day of your life it would be much more significant.

Unfortunately a lot of people have been abusing the system in order to take dogs with them where they are not normally allowed. Claiming the dog is an assistance dog would normally mean the dog would be allowed into the place. I read an article a while back about this becoming an increasing problems on planes, particularly in the US, where people were saying it's an assistance dog just to get the dog in the cabin with them.
I think that's why people were asking if your dog was registered.

However in your case, it sounds like the person wasn't even aware of assistance dogs as they kept mentioning guide dogs, so training for all staff is a good outcome. The training should also include asking to see the dog's registration to stop others bringing in random dogs and abusing the system.

It's not a legal requirement to carry it. Its not a legal requirement in the UK to carry your driving license at all times when driving like it is in some countries.

But as in your screen shot, all registered assistance dogs are issued with official documentation. In all the years I've worked with people who have assistance dogs, I've never known them not carry something official in case challenged if entering somewhere a dog would otherwise not be allowed entry.

Anyone can buy a generic assistance dog harness/jacket very cheaply though and claim their dog is an assistance dog, with no training or assessments

This surely isn’t about money it’s making sure all companies and their employees are made aware of the needs of all disabled people.
The company has apologised and have stated they will train their employees.

I think if your dog wasn’t wearing an assistance dog harness then unfortunately for you I think the restaurant was right. If your dog is an assistance dog and you need its support then fine, but if you need its help you need to be prepared to show what it is, if a dog isn’t identifiable as such then anyone and their mutt could claim access to dog free areas by saying “assistance dog”. A bit like those ridiculous people in the US who claimed all sorts of creatures were their assistance or comfort animals a few years ago. Glad you got it sorted with the restaurant anyway.

Admitting fault, apologising, and organising staff training is good. Writing it in a letter and enclosing a goodwill gesture would be better.

However £20 is beyond stingy as a gesture of goodwill! At minimum Head Office should have offered enough money to cover a meal out for 2 at a venue of your choice elsewhere. So £100 minimum? Plus invited you to come back for a complementary meal with them, at some future date, after they've completed staff training.

I think their response is fair.

£20 would easily cover the cost of any difference in meals between the two restaurants, presumably, and they've promised staff training.

I don't know why you'd expect a free meal on top.

I think you were both reasonable and unreasonable, sorry. I think the problem was partly of your own making as I think you were being too literal. Just say it's a guide dog. I know you shouldn't have to, but the person you were dealing with seems not to have known about assistance dogs. And yes, that's on his training and he needs to receive more, but I think you could have stayed in this instance if you had accepted his limited knowledge and accomodated that. Not that his knowledge should be limited, he needs more training, but he might be new or have limited intelligence or have English as a second language.

I think the restaurant's response was appropriate in this case, they have admitted their mistake and agreed to do more training and offered a voucher.

Hi OP. I'm sorry you experienced this. I think a bit of extra staff training (possibly chain wide) would be beneficial. I agree with @KaihahUmoniiv that the legislation needs clarifying and strengthening. I had no idea there was an assistant dog system and would have assumed that genuine assistance dogs fell under the guide dog scheme and therefore I would have classed your dog as a guide dog.

What has probably happened (especially in a chain restaurant) is that they went dog friendly. Unfortunately there are a growing minority of entitled dog owners with very poorly trained dogs who like to attend restaurants with them. I myself in the last 6 months have seen - dogs on tables, dogs weeing up chair and table legs, dogs licking plates, dogs on long extender leads roaming the entire restaurant, dogs snapping and barking at waiting staff and members of the public, dogs barking and snapping at each other, dogs sniffing and putting noses in people's bags and coat pockets, dogs jumping up people walking past and high chairs. This is in our town. Country wide I imagine they are seeing this tenfold. The chain has probably decided to go back to the "guide dogs only" policy. Unfortunately with training been 2 shifts and high staff turn over and probably just an email to the manager of the restaurant the message has become somewhat muddled. I imagine what the intention is that by going with guide dogs only, only genuine assistance dogs and guide dogs will attend.

This is where I agree with the PP that legislation needs to catch up and be clarified. There will be the CF who decide that their little Fido is an assistance dog despite no paperwork and will blag through due to pure CF confidence. For the protection of people who genuinely need these animals to help there does need to be a system of registration and training scheme that is known to all members of the public. I imagine there will always be the CF who will register their Fido as a guide dog just so they can have them go everywhere with them.

But it's not a guide dog, and saying that it was could cause all sorts of problems when it became obvious that OP didn't have a visual impairment.

He’s trained to only lay eggs at home on his special egg shelf.

The rest of the dog owning community should step in and pick up the poo in the unlikely event her dog does one.

OP would at least be seated by then and could ask for the manager if there was a further issue. Surely not all staff members were as uninformed? I'm assuming it was one particularly silly or new/inexperienced member of staff and unfortunately you'll get those everwhere.

The restaurant apologised and said they would do staff training. Maybe enough to cover a meal for two would habe been better since that was what you didn't get at that restaurant.

But the OP wasn't asked about her medical needs, she was asked if the dog was a guide dog, to which she replied he was an assistance dog, she was asked what that means and went on to explain what the dog does for her and her disability.
A simpler and clearer way to respond, and without needing to explain any disabilities or the dogs actual tasks, would have been to say that a registered assistance dog is the same as a registered guide dog - because he asked what assistance dog meant, not why she had one or what the dog does for her on a daily basis - no need to explain anything other than an assistance dog is the same as a guide dog and therefore allowed into restaurants etc under the same rules.

Yes he should have been aware of that in the first place, but the company has admitted that flaw, are seeking to resolve it and offered compensation - if OP doesn't feel the compensation is enough she can ask for more, even possibly ask for the steps they've taken training wise to improve the knowledge of their staff and prevent further discrimination where assistance dogs are concerned

@Myinterestingnewpath

It's definitely discrimination and it's definitely wrong. And it definitely needs reporting. Write to head office (or email) so that this doesn't happen to anybody else.

I know several people with Guide Dogs who have limited vision. I also know a few people have Guide Dogs who have limited hearing, and also a few who have one to help with neurological conditions like yours. This guy was ignorant at best. Bigoted, and discriminatory, at worst.

Definitely write to the head office about this. This should not be happening. I'm really sorry this happened to you.

It sounds like the OP caused the situation by refusing to show assistance ID for the dog or being unable to do so. Surely there's some sort of ID that can clip on to the harness to avoid this type of scenario. Asking people to just accept the word of an owner that a dog really is an assistance dog seems awkward.

Sometimes when you have to go, you have to go.
Dogs are no different.

You can get claw (designed for people with mobility issues) thing that picks it up in a bag without needing to bend down.
It may be worth getting one of these just in case.

Do you have any proof that he’s your assistance dog?
Like people need to show their blue badge to park in a disabled spot.

Lots of people claim to have assistance dogs but they’re not. Whereas if you had s badge or something it would be way better than having to explain your condition which would make me feel
a bit embarrassed having to explain myself in front of everyone.

Does your dog have some kind of tag or label to say that he/she's a support dog? From their point of view, anybody with no visible disability could come in and say 'This is my support dog' - and how are they to know?

I agree with you, treating you to a nice meal would have ben a better way to make up for it, once they realised their mistake.

It’s not required by law so OP not having her ID with her or not showing the ID for whatever reason is no excuse for the restaurant to refuse access. There is no difference between the 2 scenarios in the original post I quoted, as service dog users are not required by law, as the law currently stands, to carry their ID

I agree that anyone can buy a harness or tag and try to claim their pet is a service dog and legislation does need to be clarified, but that’s not on the OP.

Anyone can call their dog an assistance dog. Only guide dogs are properly trained.

The next day I rang head office and they admitted that what he did is unlawful, and they would do some staff training.

They have admitted fault and said they will take action.

Why are you posting?