WOLVES REJECT DISABLED FANS PROTEST

18-09-2009

Wolves fans parliament has rejected complaints about their club’s new criteria for disabled fans’ parking spaces – even though the revised rules have seen both a T10 paraplegic and an 87-year old wheelchair user ejected from their regular spots.

Stirrer blogger Brendan King, who uses an adapted vehicle and can’t walk or stand, is one of those affected.

He complained to the club on behalf of himself and Thomas Jones, a wheelchair user who has been following Wanderers since 1948.

Efforts to engage the club’s chief executive Jez Moxey came to nought.

Instead, he referred the issue to PR boss Matt Grayson, who referred the issue to the parliament which met last night.

Now Kingy has been told by disabled supporters rep Anne Pearce in an email that nothing has changed.

She said:

Hi Brendan

just returned from meeting. Unfortunately, having put yours and Thomas’s views to parliament, including Jez Moxey Matt Grayson and Lynne O’ Reardon the division stands.

I was not invited to the meeting which determined the new criteria. They only had one disabled representative, Darren Cash who helped to decide who had parking spaces, at a seperate meeting which was held on afternoon without full parliament.

Brendan commented: “It's interesting that she says she wasn't invited to the selection meeting (So this meeting consisted of only 3 people).

“In emails to me, Karen Salt [Supporter Liaison Officer] and in a telephone conversation with me, Lyndsey Beckett (Disabled supporters coordinator), both stated categorically that both fans reps were invited to the selection meeting and were present. Plus two members of Wolves staff who they wouldn't identify.

“Anne also indicates that the selection criteria / rules were changed this season which, though plainly obvious, is not admitted by either of the above.

“In her email to me, Karen Salt has said that several years ago, following complaints, they consulted the Benefits Agency and Wolves Council to create the current system for selection (with less emphasis on just wheelchair users). Implying that the system is tried and tested, well advised and had not been altered this season.

“But the criteria were obviously changed without warning and without setting out the changes on the application form or the covering letter. Unjust!

“In other words, faced with high demand, they 'changed the goalposts' after the 'match' had started. And introduced a flawed, arbitary set of criteria which ruled out people like me and Tom quite unjustly.

“It all stinks.”

DISCUSS THIS ON THE STIRRER FORUM