A FATHER who took one of the UK's most successful theme parks to court over a seating row in a restaurant involving his disabled daughters has said he has been threatened with a legal bill which could bankrupt him after bailiffs demanded £6,000 in legal fees.
Paul Edwards, 50, sued Flamingo Land to court after a manager refused to serve the family at a nearby picnic area rather than directly outside a restaurant at the theme park during a week-long holiday in July 2010.
Mr Edwards, who is registered blind, claimed the demand that the family move amounted to discrimination as the busy restaurant was unsuitable for his daughter's Melissa, 15, who has Down's syndrome with autism and challenging behaviour, and her sister, Isla, eight, who has cystic fibrosis, and struggles to cope in crowds.
He won £4,000 in the original case, however, the verdict was overturned on appeal. Mr Edwards, of Kilmarnock, East Ayrshire, backed by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), took the case to the Supreme Court which again ruled in Flamingo Land's favour.
Although the EHCR paid all costs related to the appeals, Mr Edwards has been left with a £6,000 bill for Flamingo Land's costs dating back to the original case. He says that bailiffs turned up at his property last week and demanded the sum within a fortnight.
"If it doesn't get paid I can expect them to bankrupt me," he said. A spokeswoman for Flamingo Land, which is based in North Yorkshire, defended its actions, saying the "whole regrettable episode" could have been avoided had Mr Edwards agreed to move to a table in the restaurant.
She said his original request to be served on a picnic table was "against our health and safety guidelines and therefore unreasonable, and unhygienic from a food standards point of view."
She added: "The company is unaware of the claimant's personal financial circumstances but had to defend this disability discrimination claim to protect our reputation and standing within the industry."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article