Wheelchair user barred from London bus as priority rules are ignored, sparking calls for better enforcement

A wheelchair user in West Norwood claims she was forced off a bus after two mothers refused to fold their buggies in the designated priority space, highlighting ongoing challenges with enforcing accessibility rules on public transport.

Maria, a wheelchair user from West Norwood, London, has spoken out after being heckled and forced off an Arriva bus by two mothers who refused to fold their buggies in the designated wheelchair priority area. According to Maria, the incident occurred while she was trying to board the bus on her way to a hospital appointment. Despite the driver deploying the ramp for her use, the space reserved for wheelchair users was occupied by the buggies, and no one, including the driver, intervened to enforce the legal priority she is entitled to. Maria said she filmed the situation, but no other passengers stepped in to help, resulting in a 20-minute delay and her missing a crucial appointment which had to be rescheduled months later. She expressed frustration over the lack of support from both the driver and fellow passengers, emphasising that wheelchair users legally have priority in this space, a rule reinforced by the Supreme Court and Transport for London (TfL) policies ^[1].

TfL’s accessible travel guidelines clearly state that all buses must have a designated wheelchair space, with priority given to wheelchair users to ensure their safety and accessibility during travel. When a wheelchair user needs the space, passengers in that area, such as those with buggies, are expected to fold them or move to make room. This is underscored by signage inside buses communicating wheelchair priority. If a wheelchair user is not occupying the space, others may use it on a first-come, first-served basis, but this changes once a wheelchair user boards. The TfL website explicitly advises buggy users to share the space or fold up their buggies when asked, supporting the legal priority wheelchair users hold ^[3].

However, the incident highlights some of the practical challenges wheelchair users face, particularly involving enforcement of these rules. According to a policy document from Transport for All, although bus drivers are required to allow wheelchair users to board and can request passengers to vacate the wheelchair area, passengers are not legally compelled to comply if they refuse. This creates a grey area in real-world scenarios where enforcement depends heavily on drivers’ willingness to manage disputes. Furthermore, Transport for All notes that individual transport authorities, such as TfL, have the authority to enforce wheelchair priority and take action when necessary, yet the effectiveness of this enforcement can vary ^[4].

Maria’s complaint with TfL and Arriva reportedly triggered an investigation. TfL’s lead on Customer Insight, Strategy and Experience, Mark Evers, issued an apology to Maria and reiterated that wheelchair users should always have priority access to the designated space. He also highlighted efforts made by TfL to educate drivers through a new disability training course developed with specialist providers, aiming to ensure that drivers know their responsibilities when it comes to supporting disabled passengers. Evers confirmed that the incident was being investigated urgently in coordination with Arriva ^[1].

The response from Arriva deflected queries about London buses to TfL, emphasising TfL’s role as the regulator of such services. However, Maria criticised the lack of communication and accountability from both organisations following her formal complaint, suggesting that driver training and company policies on enforcing wheelchair priority need strengthening. She described the situation as a reflection of broader societal insensitivity, underscoring the daily struggles wheelchair users face when public transport rules are not upheld ^[1].

Public reaction to the video Maria shared on TikTok, which has garnered over two million views, revealed divided opinions. Many users expressed disbelief and frustration that the bus driver did not intervene to clear the space and facilitate her boarding, pointing to the duty of care expected from transport staff. Conversely, some defended the mothers with buggies, highlighting challenges such as managing children and the impracticality of folding buggies on a moving bus without assistance. This division underscores the complex realities faced by all passengers navigating limited space on public transport ^[1].

The UK government and disability charities offer guidance on accessible travel that reinforces these legal priorities. Buses in the UK must feature priority seating and spaces designed for disabled passengers, including wheelchair users, with clear signage, safety features like movable armrests, and areas for assistance dogs. Operators are also required to provide training to their staff to accommodate disabled passengers adequately and ensure compliance with accessibility standards ^[2][5]. Organisations like Scope and Transport for All provide further advocacy and advice to empower disabled travellers about their rights and ensure accessible transport options are respected and enforced ^[6][7].

This incident involving Maria throws into sharp relief the persistent issues around enforcement on public transport and the need for continuous education, training, and vigilance. While legal frameworks are in place to protect wheelchair users, real-world practice often hinges on human behaviour and the willingness of bus drivers and passengers to uphold these rights. It is a pressing reminder of how everyday acts of accommodation or neglect can significantly impact the lives of disabled people relying on public transport for essential travel.

📌 Reference Map:

• Paragraph 1 – ^[1] (South Wales Argus)
• Paragraph 2 – ^[1], ^[3] (TfL Accessible Travel Guide)
• Paragraph 3 – ^[4] (Transport for All)
• Paragraph 4 – ^[1] (South Wales Argus)
• Paragraph 5 – ^[1] (South Wales Argus)
• Paragraph 6 – ^[1] (South Wales Argus)
• Paragraph 7 – ^[2] (UK Government), ^[5] (Bus Operator Policy), ^[6][7] (Transport for All, Scope)

Source: Noah Wire Services

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score:
7

Notes:
The incident described in the narrative is recent, with the article published on November 3, 2025. However, similar incidents involving wheelchair users being denied access to bus priority spaces have been reported in the past, such as cases in Strood in November 2024 ([kentonline.co.uk](https://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/wheelchair-user-told-you-give-disabled-people-a-bad-name-i-316476/?utm_source=openai)) and Haddenham in February 2020 ([bucksherald.co.uk](https://www.bucksherald.co.uk/news/people/wheelchair-user-ellie-zavaroni-left-stranded-by-arriva-280-bus-in-haddenham-1383621?utm_source=openai)). The narrative does not specify the exact date of the incident, making it challenging to assess the freshness of the specific event. Additionally, the article includes references to guidelines and policies from 2017 and 2023, which may indicate recycled content. The presence of a press release suggests a higher freshness score, but the lack of specific dates for the incident and the inclusion of older material warrant caution.

Quotes check

Score:
6

Notes:
The narrative includes direct quotes attributed to Maria, the wheelchair user, and Mark Evers, TfL’s lead on Customer Insight, Strategy and Experience. A search for the earliest known usage of these quotes did not yield any matches, suggesting they may be original or exclusive content. However, without confirmation of the exact dates of these statements, it’s difficult to fully assess the originality of the quotes.

Source reliability

Score:
7

Notes:
The narrative originates from the South Wales Argus, a regional newspaper. While it is a known publication, its reach and reputation may not be as extensive as national outlets. The inclusion of references to official guidelines and policies from Transport for London and the UK government adds credibility to the report. However, the lack of direct quotes from these organizations or other reputable sources may limit the overall reliability.

Plausability check

Score:
8

Notes:
The narrative describes a plausible scenario involving a wheelchair user being denied access to a bus priority space occupied by buggies. Similar incidents have been reported in the past, such as the case in Strood in November 2024 ([kentonline.co.uk](https://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/wheelchair-user-told-you-give-disabled-people-a-bad-name-i-316476/?utm_source=openai)). The inclusion of official guidelines and policies from Transport for London and the UK government supports the plausibility of the claims. However, the lack of specific details about the incident, such as the exact date and location, makes it difficult to fully verify the event.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM

Summary:
The narrative presents a plausible and recent incident involving a wheelchair user being denied access to a bus priority space. While the inclusion of official guidelines and policies adds credibility, the lack of specific details about the incident, such as the exact date and location, makes it challenging to fully verify the event. The presence of recycled content and the absence of direct quotes from reputable sources further complicate the assessment. Therefore, the overall assessment is ‘OPEN’ with a medium confidence level.