Disabled bogs.

[DiamondEcho]

Depending on the way people are disabled, can mean their bowels are 'disabled' too [logical eh?]. If so it means to take a dump you have to shove a big jelly plug up your a*.... and then wait, and wait... and who knows. And then maybe things can get pretty dramatic, it takes time.
This is part of why the disabled have different toilets; their needs are different. I'd hope that anyone who knew and respected that, that wasn't disabled, would realise why they should not use them.

[pds2008]

For me - using the Disabled Loo is like going business class - more space, cleaner, more facilities (just don't drink the water)

[csearle]

TJJH

Was that by deed pole? C.

[PinkDalek]

As against Deed Poll?

Btw, sure you know it but a Deed Poll isn’t needed to change name (and I’m not talking about getting married etc).

[csearle]

As against Deed Poll?

Btw, sure you know it but a Deed Poll isn’t needed to change name (and I’m not talking about getting married etc).

Ha Ha, totally out of my depth here! C.

[tjh290633]

TJJH

Was that by deed pole? C.

Finger trouble, I'm afraid.

TJH

[YeadonLad]

In many places, especially on trains, there is only one toilet - for use by everybody.

[Markab01]

In many places, especially on trains, there is only one toilet - for use by everybody.

I read, somewhere, during the week that it will be to expensive to convert the toilets on certain trains in Wales so that they can be used by the disabled. The solution, so that they comply with disability access legislation, will be to lock the toilets so that no one can use them.

Markab01

[tjh290633]

In many places, especially on trains, there is only one toilet - for use by everybody.

I read, somewhere, during the week that it will be to expensive to convert the toilets on certain trains in Wales so that they can be used by the disabled. The solution, so that they comply with disability access legislation, will be to lock the toilets so that no one can use them.

Markab01

That is correct. The trains concerned are the 4-wheeled "Pacers", which are due to be replaced by cascaded units, displaced by electrification. That has fallen behind schedule, so the Pacers have to be kept in service beyond the deadline for compliance. As they are used on short distance runs in the South Wales valleys, there is no obligation to provide toilets. Hence closing the existing toilets makes the trains compliant. Replacing the existing toilets with accessible toilets would not be justified for the expected life extension.

TJH

[Itsallaguess]

That is correct. The trains concerned are the 4-wheeled "Pacers", which are due to be replaced by cascaded units, displaced by electrification. That has fallen behind schedule, so the Pacers have to be kept in service beyond the deadline for compliance. As they are used on short distance runs in the South Wales valleys, there is no obligation to provide toilets.

Hence closing the existing toilets makes the trains compliant. Replacing the existing toilets with accessible toilets would not be justified for the expected life extension.

I think it was also suggested that because these were local routes, that investment in station-toilets would be improved, to help mitigate any removal of on-train facilities.

It does highlight the pickle we get ourselves into sometimes though, with well-meaning legislation sometimes leading to unforeseen and quite unfortunate real-world outcomes...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess