Carers ticket - is it reasonable

[Rechargedfor2024]

my friend and I are taking both our children on a bunch of activities. There is 3 disabled children in the group. We applied for nimbus / access cards as one attraction only use these as form of proof.
when they came
1 child has plus 2 in the carers symbol
and the others didn’t get the symbol at all.
I then read up about it and had seen that many parents had said the same and it’s not always automatic that you will get a carers symbol especially in children.
there has been some negative comments about this online from what we could read.
it seemed like it was more younger children not getting them.
my friend said maybe it’s because say a 3 year old would beee to be supervised at all times regardless of disability and that so it doesn’t fill under prevents one attending because of disability.
do you think this is reasonable ?

It's not great - you have to send realms of personal medical info eg that your child plays with their own faeces to a private company as opposed to showing an attraction a photo of a dla award that gives zero medical info to that company just states the dla award.

the relevant term their is "a parent" do you realise how many disabled children need their parent just for them or even both parents just to attend to them. You need adults to look after other children in the party. It's reasonable to expect a parent to loook after 3/4 of their own dc alone. So instead of mum or dad taking the dc out you have to pay for an extra adult to come just for that under 12.

I think it's a money making scheme for nimbus and a way for businesses to reduce the amount of free carers (money) given as a reasonable adjustment without being accountable and having angry customers blame them.

Ds has +2 without any issue as that's what he needs- complex needs including severe autism. I ended up paying the £15 due to the number of places that require it now. I resented doing that but came round to it being the same cost as the cea card for three years.

The cea card is also similar as it isn't given to younger children who would require a constant supervision. I must admit we 'benefited' from free carers passes whom my son was younger but I do understand why companies are trying to reduce costs associated with disability.

If you take merlin as an example, they must have given out thousands of free annual passes each year to young children who wouldn't be able to attend a theme park on their own anyway. The rap queues are similar in that now they're are just too many people who qualify for rap to the system workable.

If you re-read my first post, I was asking you whether you are sure you have to pay for the card and it isn’t just the attraction using Nimbus but their free application rather than for a full card. This is what happens for a RAP for Merlin and for companion tickets for some theatres. For these types of attractions people don’t have to pay for a full card, the venue isn’t insisting on it, although people can choose to do so if they wish.

@KeepGoingThomas

I don't really know why you are repeating yourself. I was talking about venues that insist on the cars which is what OP said she had to do.

Oh and I did ask OP what the venue was so could double check they needed the full card but she didn't say so I can only post on what she said.

The general rule with children, and this applies to dla too, is what they require over and above what would be required for a typical child of their age. Of course a child of 3 needs to be with a caregiver (typically their parent) at an attraction, you only would get a carers concession so young if you need 2 adults/a paid carer as well as the parent or similar. We qualified for carers concessions and dla when dd reached 10 because unlike her peers she needed an adult with her all the time. Dsd has a carers card and hers says plus 2 because she's an adult but needs 2 carers at all times due to severity of disability.

@premiur I repeated myself because you repeated the question in the post you quoted me on.

Most people would want a family day out with both parents included anyway, not one member of the family left home. Also loads of single parents manage a SN DC alongside other DC, they often don't have any other option if no support network. I've got a SN child and he couldn't manage on his own at 17 but I wouldn't have left any of my DC without additional needs under 12. I would drive them and be there for them but let them move about a bit on their own.

Perhaps becsue I was trying, badly, to explain I was not talking about venues that do not ask for a full card. Never mind.

If said age would need supervision anyway then no of course you shouldn’t be free

It's an abhorrent scheme and is not in place to help any disabled person. My child has a card, I eventually paid as it was time consuming filling out the same form numerous times. It added too much hassle especially when planning trips is stressful enough. Interestingly as soon as I paid I got the +1 but they haven't included the toilet symbol. This caused an awful experience at one venue. I emailed to ask for the toilet symbol after this incident, nimbus said they would for a price! I didn't respond to this. I've also had to get a letter from the hospital to state we need +2. I haven't contacted nimbus as I know they will only ask for more money to add the +2.
This whole scheme is badly managed. Taking a disabled person anywhere is incredibly difficult and this card doesn't help, infact it hinders.
Also I want to add, I may get a free carer ticket but we are regularly at a loss. For example I booked the theatre for December. We got there and my child couldn't manage. There was no help from the theatre, it was a simple case of us walking out meaning I paid for nothing. This isn't an isolated incident but I'm left with the choice of either not trying and staying at home or giving it a go and trying to have some normality. I'm not complaining, I understand the predicament.
Disabled people miss out on so much, my child isn't currently receiving an education, we are never invited to parties, family events or play dates. the least they deserve is an access scheme with their best interests in mind

I had this argument for my disabled child elsewhere. The thing is I can easily take out my other 4 children alone, no fuss. My disabled child needs 1:1. I can’t calm her/ chase her/ remove her to a quiet space and safely supervise even one of the others. I need someone with full eyes on her, ready to remove her if needed. Usually this is during queuing situations so it means it’s effectively inaccessible for any other children with me. I pay for five children, none of them actually access a single thing if I’m the only one present. I remember once paying at the science museum for 3 including her. There were schools in the wonderlab, she lasted around 1.5 minutes with the behaviour and noise. I paid for 3 children full price plus an adult for a whole 1.5 minutes, they wouldn’t even allow us to change the date to try a quiet time

I agree. Sending all this really personal medical data to some organisation is not tolerable to me. And DLA have already decided how much support you need but this organisation seems to think it knows better.

Privacy of my data is an issue.
Security of my data is an issue.
And this business model seems exploitative and like money for old rope.

Nimbus +1 for adults slightly ableist? I saw this post where it was asked if ppl thought it was unfair young children with disabilities, did not automatically get the +1 symbol, based on the fact that any child, disabled or not would need an adult with them- No 5 year old can go to legoland without assistance, I agree, as did most others. Only those with substantial extra needs, for example needing a qualified carer to administer medication, or needing a lot of extra equipment i suppose like oxygen tanks, whereby just mum wouldn't be enough help-would qualify, makes sense to me and seems fair.
However, for adults it gets a bit complicated as the rules are the same.
On the section about the +1 symbol it states that
"The support needed must be in excess of what could be reasonably expected of family/friends already accompanying you and must be due to disability-related needs.

The idea I guess being that your mate could carry your bag for and, or go to the bar to collect your food, you don't need a carer for things like that.
Which is all well and good...if you have a friend or family member to go with, or one that wanted to attend the same event as you, in the first place.
If you don't, but you still need someone to go with you due to your disability, you would eithee be looking to employ someone, say from a carers agency to assist you, or possibly paying for a full priced ticket for a friend family member to go somewhere they had no interest in, just so you had the help you needed. Given that the entire idea is to not get the cost of needing assistance be a barrier to you attending events, I thinks it's unreasonable to asume you would always have someone going with you anyway. Lots of people do not have friends and go out alone, many have become estranged from friends and family- by choice or circumstance, and this is especially true for many disabled people. I think this really should be based on whether you NEED assistance, not if you have a friend who can help you or not. I can prove I need the help, I can't prove I have no one willing, able and or available to provide it-should that exclude me from support? My social life will not improve unless I am able to go out and meet people, which I can't do because I need assistance, but nimbus thinks a friend or family member (because apparently all disabled people have huge support network?) should be sufficient. And you can see the catch 22 I find myself in.
Am I being unreasonable?

I have emailed nimbus explaining this and asking them to reconsider the +1 symbol on my card, just looking for others opinions?

You are missing the point re a five year old , yes they need an adult, but often they need an adult just for them. I could not have looked after my disabled child age 5 and their sibling at the same time completely impossible. So I needed to pay for a friend to come along as well.

I didn't miss the point at all I clearly say that I agreed it shouldn't be "automatic" for a disabled child, not that a 5 year old would never required extra help over and above the help a non disabled child required. Having raised 2 children both with special needs, 1 needed more help than the average child of the same age, one didn't despite having a disability, hence why in my case not giving it automatically to child 2, simply because they had a diagnosis wouldn't have been something that prevented me from taking them to a particular place, because I didnt need the extra help, and obvioudly i was going to be there anyway as the Parent as any other parent of a 5 year old would be. Its cost me exactly the same as it would have if my child had no disability. And so the cost of taking help wasnt a barrier, which is the exactly the point of it. And why it's judged on a case by case basis. It's a legal argument, not a moral or ethical one. Accommodations have to be made law based on need. If you're disabled 5 year old does not need and extra carer to be able to access somewhere, then legally they are not entitled to it, and companies are not obliged to provide a solution such as a free carer ticket, for a carer you don't need.

My point was that as an adult, the idea that 'someone would be with you anyway' isn't a fact, it's an assumption.

You did miss the point again. It's not about the five year old needing an extra carer it's that one carer can only look after that child and no others. A parent should be able to take two children age for example 2 and 5 put alone. Clearly even your child with more needs did not need 1-1 care or you could not have taken both out alone.
It is equally as hard for a parent with a child who needs one to one care that has sibling than it is for a disabled adult. It is also much more likely a disabled adult would go to an event with friends, than a friend of a parent with disabled children would choose to accompany them to peppa pig world and be happy to pay for themselves.

Ok, you're clearly not understanding what I'm saying regarding child carers, the point was regarding the 'AUTOMATIC' award of the +1 sign for disabled children purely because of the fact that a child has A disability. Also, as unfair as it may seem to you, being able to care for your other children at the same time is not a relevant factor on awarding the +1 symbol, or relevant to disability rights laws in any way. It's a simple case of does the disability and associated needs of the child mean they need significantly more help than any other child of the same age without a disability would. Yes or no? The care needs of any other children in the family are not a consideration. You seem to be getting confused by what is relevant and or mandated by law and what you think is 'fair'. This is strictly about disability rights laws, and the legal obligations of business to make accommodations for people with disabilities.

But even though this was not even the point of my post. Your apparently need to rant about your own experience that is not related to my question at all, has actually highlighted the exact kind ableist attitude that my entire post is about by stating

"It is also much more likely a disabled adult would go to an event with friends"

This assumption is totally unreasonable, and is the ENTIRE point of my post.

Firstly, some people are very lonely and do not have friends.

Secondly, even if you could go with a friend is it reasonable to expect them to act as your carer, when they are supposed to be enjoying a day or night out themselves?

Also, given that you do not know the conditions my children have, the age difference between them, if I did ever take them both out alone if I had a carer or what either of my children are capable or not capable of, along with a multitude of other facts you are not in possession of, This was and extremely bold, rude and insulting statement to make.

"Clearly even your child with more needs did not need 1-1 care or you could not have taken both out alone"

I would be extremely interested to know what information you based this -entirely incorrect by the way-statement on? Or did you just feel the need to be rude? I have not once, nor would I ever, presume to make statements about your child's disability and needs, so I am entirely unsure why you felt the need to.

Just interested re you saying you were asked for more money to add symbols? Was that from nimbus themselves? I applied for a symbol change, as it clearly states you can if you disagree with the initial decision, but was not asked to pay anything extra? I did pay the £15 because as you said, it's easier to just fill in 1 form, but it's works out at £5 per year, it's got to cost at least that in admin, wages, printing of the card and postage right? Also, compared to the Cea card which there is no free option for only last 2 years, only works for 1 thing and is on balance more expensive. I don't think the small fee is unreasonable, but asking for more to re evaluated an application, and I suppose if successful it could be seen as correcting a mistake, is not right? I would say it's well worth another email to question this. Good luck

Yes I was charged to add symbols, they explained that this was to cover reprinting the card for the symbol change.

Aah, I see, so it wasn't a total extra fee, just to cover costs of the physical card? Still seems a bit unfair though... they really should offer a digital one you can add to your Google wallet or apple pay like you can with things like clubcards/railcards etc.

Yes a digital card would be good but i do know some struggle with digital and constantly having to show apps etc.
I think it would be easier if they had a blanket policy and had this clearly stated. Currently it appears they are charging some and not others, which doesn't make sense Nor is it fair.
It's just a really bad process and is not set out to help the disabled.
The issue is that now, many companies have signed up to it so the disabled have no choice.

I think in theory it's a good idea, but it definitely has issues, and I do question the qualifications of the people who make the decisions on which symbols to award.i couldn't find that information anywhere. Probablly all ex ATOS lol. Like a lot of things for disabled people they will ask for evidence that just doesnt exist for anyone like a letter from your GP or specialist detailing the help you need,??? I cant even get my GP SURGERY to answer the phone! Which in practice is not something anyone is ever given from anyone. It's unlikely your GP actually treats you anyway, and your consultant or specialist does not write letters like this. Even if they could, how would anyone KNOW what HELP you need? They can say what's wrong, what the condition can or could cause etc but there's no way to quantify these things in a real way, to prove that you need help. Which is where this scheme seems to be failing. Its like you have Enhanced rate PIP,? whatever, that proves nothing, we want a letter from your GP who last saw you about your condition 7 years ago before you were referred to a specialist-they will be the ones who really know how your condition affects you on a daily basis! Yes we know you have only one leg, but that doesnt prove you cant queue for a long time does it? OK I'm being silly now, but honestly this is how it feels sometimes. It's like you have to prove the unprovable. If enhanced mobility isn't evidence enough for a can't stand for long periods or can't walk long distances symbol what on earth is? 🙄

You are misunderstanding the symbols the access card uses. Someone could well be in receipt of enhanced PIP but not be eligible for the standing and queuing symbol on an access card. For example, many who have the ‘level access’ symbol wouldn’t also be eligible for the ‘standing and queueing symbol because Nimbus state “We do not add the standing and queuing symbol for wheelchair users as if a queue is accessible this should present no problems. If a queue is not accessible then this will be addressed by each venue as an adjustment related to the need for level access.” Another example, some, but not all, who get enhanced PIP under the unable to plan and follow the route of an unfamiliar journey criteria would still be able to stand and queue..