BBC: Autistic Boy 'mocked' by Great Western Railway Staff at Paddington

[ArchieWoodbine]

From reading the article, I don't think the lady's gripe is with the ticketing policy so much as the politenss and professionalism of the staff involved (or accused lack of). I'm sure it's an un-enviable job working in customer service at a major station, but the real failing here (assuming that the article is a fair representation) is that the staff didn't treat a passenger with respect or courtesy. Had they explained the limitations of the ticket, empaphised, offered alternatives (such as customer lounges or quiet nearby areas to wait - there's Regent's canal barely five minutes away), or even asked the train-manager in question whether it was okay, I doubt any of this would have blown-up.

Or, perhaps they did and this lady was being particularly belligerant to them in the first place? We're only getting one side of the story after all.

 

[Esker-pades]

If they require flexibility, should they purchase a flexible ticket rather than an advance non flexible ticket though? And is requiring them to do this treating them differently due to a disability?

From the original article:

She said they had arrived two hours early for their train and asked staff at the help desk if they could be transferred to an earlier one because her son was "so overwhelmed" by the station environment.

That implies that an autistic meltdown was very probable. Such events are virtually impossible to predict, impossible to control and massively distressing for all parties (the person with Autistic Spectrum Disorder having the meltdown, anybody with them, anyone who happens to witness it etc.). Thus, it is good for all parties if needs are taken into account to prevent or limit such an event.

 

[Jonfun]

Surely all it needed was to ask to see their tickets, and if they needed to pay an excess, direct them (or if possible take them across) to the ticket office or give them the alternative of somewhere quiet to wait for their ticket to be valid?

 

[Starmill]

Fact is though it's likely that Revenue Protection would hold them accountable to their ticket.

What? If the guard chooses to grant permission, then that's the end of the matter.

Guard after guard gets asked all the time whether someone with an advance ticket for a later train can get this one. Some guards allow because it makes life easy, yet defeats the marketing strategy of the train company.

It does? How? I can think of one occasion where I was refused travel with an Advance on the wrong train. There have been perhaps 100 or so where I have been explicitly permitted to travel. Marketing is relevant... how?

Others take a hard line and always say no, which, technically is what they should do and what their TOC policy tells them to do

So you know the policy of every TOC? And in all cases it's TOC policy that guards should not use discretion towards customers on the wrong train with an Advance?

This is a matter for guards and their company. Clearly the majority of guards apply their own good judgement to the situation.

Your idea that the "revenue policy" of every TOC instructs guards to show no discretion seems to be unique to you.

 

[pt_mad]

What? If the guard chooses to grant permission, then that's the end of the matter.


It does? How? I can think of one occasion where I was refused travel with an Advance on the wrong train. There have been perhaps 100 or so where I have been explicitly permitted to travel. Marketing is relevant... how?

So you know the policy of every TOC? And in all cases it's TOC policy that guards should not use discretion towards customers on the wrong train with an Advance?

This is a matter for guards and their company. Clearly the majority of guards apply their own good judgement to the situation.

Your idea that the "revenue policy" of every TOC instructs guards to show no discretion seems to be unique to you.

Sorry I didn't mean revenue protection would hold them accountable for their ticket when a guard had endorsed it. I meant under most other circumstances. E.g. if the revenue protection were doing a block on the platform and somebody with a disabled Railcard for example presented a ticket for a later train. They'd still likely be held accountable for their ticket as far as I can see? It's not opinion it's just that staff in charge of revenue protection are there to enforce the rule and that would mean no valid ticket. Its not my rules its the national conditions of travel?

Please see my earlier post where I said I have and will always give leeway and be flexible, but that is the staff going out of their way and using their discretion to ignore the advance ticket time to help someone. It's them choosing not to enforce the rules to help someone out so to speak.

Toc policy is likely to be to always apply the rules, and the ticket rules they set. Common sense tells us that. Otherwise, they wouldn't be rules, they'd be guidance?
I must admit though I'm surprised you mentioned you have been allowed circa 100 times to travel on a different train to your advance ticket? Advances are usually sold for the quietest trains, hence they are so strict and give no flexibility, booked train only.

As you say, a guard endorsement would be different, but the guard would need to ensure any change of guard further along was made aware, as well as potentially something to show exit barrier staff.

 

[vdriud]

I work with autistic children and this posts nails the challenge for the mother. She may have set off early in case of a meltdown en route and if happened to be a challenge free trip to padd as she arrived early.

I'm surprised at how many on here do not understand the challenges of autism

From the original article:

That implies that an autistic meltdown was very probable. Such events are virtually impossible to predict, impossible to control and massively distressing for all parties (the person with Autistic Spectrum Disorder having the meltdown, anybody with them, anyone who happens to witness it etc.). Thus, it is good for all parties if needs are taken into account to prevent or limit such an event....
.

 

[Esker-pades]

I work with autistic children and this posts nails the challenge for the mother. She may have set off early in case of a meltdown en route and if happened to be a challenge free trip to padd as she arrived early.

I'm surprised at how many on here do not understand the challenges of autism

I'm not at all surprised. Assumptions and views of ASD (Autistic Spectrum Disorder) largely come from the media who are fairly awful at covering this sort of thing. Most often, it is the sensory aspect of the disorder that is entirely ignored because the entire focus is "isn't their confusion at a social thing hilarious!" (Big Bang Theory, I'm looking at you). I don't have a particular problem with a lack of knowledge of ASD, but it's when the lack of knowledge causes problems that is the concern.

 

[Starmill]

Advances are usually sold for the quietest trains

Sadly this is a misconception and is usually not true. They're sold in whatever way generates the company the most money, for the most part.

I bought an Advance on the day of travel recently for a TransPennine Express service to Edinburgh which was so busy (and predictably so) that there was a real risk that not everyone would be able to board the train. I don't feel guilty about this because it's the train companies legitimate commercial choice to intentionally overcrowd their own trains if they wish.

I must admit though I'm surprised you mentioned you have been allowed circa 100 times to travel on a different train to your advance ticket?

In general I ask only if I know the chances of success are high. For example I would not ask to board a train which is already going to be full and standing. I would also never interrupt or disturb the guard if they're obviously busy or try to deal with other matters. 100 times is probably accurate, but it is over a period of several years.

In cases where there is a crew change likely en route, I'm usually likely to acknowledge that myself and accept that it may be a problem. I might choose not to ask at all if I knew for sure there would be a crew change. Even if a crew change does occur, some guards do not view it as any trouble to hand the train over to their colleague, mentioning that a customer has been given permission to travel otherwise than on the booked service. I am sure that nearly all guards would trust the professional judgement of their direct colleagues.

 

[LowLevel]

Please see my earlier post where I said I have and will always give leeway and be flexible, but that is the staff going out of their way and using their discretion to ignore the advance ticket time to help someone. It's them choosing not to enforce the rules to help someone out so to speak.

Toc policy is likely to be to always apply the rules, and the ticket rules they set. Common sense tells us that. Otherwise, they wouldn't be rules, they'd be guidance?
I must admit though I'm surprised you mentioned you have been allowed circa 100 times to travel on a different train to your advance ticket? Advances are usually sold for the quietest trains, hence they are so strict and give no flexibility, booked train only.

As you say, a guard endorsement would be different, but the guard would need to ensure any change of guard further along was made aware, as well as potentially something to show exit barrier staff.

Are you sure? I can assure my TOC's policy is to 'do the right thing' and I passed my interview by stating that ticketing rules can be bent but safety ones cannot.

We are actively expected to use judgement and treat people well except in cases of blatant or systematic fare evasion.

Consequently if someone asks nicely to travel early and has a reason for doing so we are quite at liberty to agree.

Guards in particular are left to run their trains as they see fit as far as ticketing is concerned.

Unless the TOC is in dire financial straits it's not that uncommon.

I much prefer taking a positive stance on things - if I wanted to spend all my time sorting out ticket irregularities I'd be a revenue protection inspector.

 

[pt_mad]

Are you sure? I can assure my TOC's policy is to 'do the right thing' and I passed my interview by stating that ticketing rules can be bent but safety ones cannot.

We are actively expected to use judgement and treat people well except in cases of blatant or systematic fare evasion.

Consequently if someone asks nicely to travel early and has a reason for doing so we are quite at liberty to agree.

Guards in particular are left to run their trains as they see fit as far as ticketing is concerned.

Unless the TOC is in dire financial straits it's not that uncommon.

I much prefer taking a positive stance on things - if I wanted to spend all my time sorting out ticket irregularities I'd be a revenue protection inspector.

Please read my post #25 and you will see my personal stance. Probably not far from yours.

But what I'm trying to get at is that techically the terms and conditions which come with a ticket, are exactly that. They're not guidance they're official terms. Now guards often have the flexibility and freedom to turn a blind eye with certain advances to help people, and that's great, and as I say, because it makes life happier for both passenger and guard and avoids confrontation over an hour or whatever. But as far as I know, officially, the terms with the ticket are to be applied and choosing not to apply the terms, officially, probably isn't supported widely.
Really, nodding folks on an earlier train is just a case of a personal favour from the guard really rather than the TOC wavering the person's ticket restrictions imo.

The only problem comes if there's a revenue block at an intermediate station, and there's passengers trying to explain why they want to exit the station an hour or two hours earlier than their advance ticket. The passenger is then left having to explain, and if there's a group of them the guard may find themselves receiving a phone call asking questions. That's speaking more generally though and off topic from any potential discrimination of any passenger with a disability.

 

[LowLevel]

I do get you - I was just pointing out that my TOC effectively encourages it's staff to waive the rules at any given opportunity. It's an odd stance I know but I'm guessing their tactic is improved customer feedback or survey scores being worth more to them than the loss of revenue.

Either way they advise us to use discretion to the max and so we do

 

[pt_mad]

I do get you - I was just pointing out that my TOC effectively encourages it's staff to waive the rules at any given opportunity. It's an odd stance I know but I'm guessing their tactic is improved customer feedback or survey scores being worth more to them than the loss of revenue.

Either way they advise us to use discretion to the max and so we do

Thanks. I didn't mean to come across wrong to you and StarMill. I will always take the stance, where's there's leeway, that customer is always right. And it makes for a happier day and the customer feels like they have been looked after. It was simply the point that officially the industry sets terms and conditions per ticket, gets the person to agree to them online with advances, and then revenue protection are tasked to apply the terms, and apply them universally to all equally. Use common sense can be part of staff training, but there is such as wide range of staff and personalities around that use common sense can end up meaning a whole world of different things!

 

[bramling]

Thanks. I didn't mean to come across wrong to you and StarMill. I will always take the stance, where's there's leeway, that customer is always right. And it makes for a happier day and the customer feels like they have been looked after. It was simply the point that officially the industry sets terms and conditions per ticket, gets the person to agree to them online with advances, and then revenue protection are tasked to apply the terms, and apply them universally to all equally. Use common sense can be part of staff training, but there is such as wide range of staff and personalities around that use common sense can end up meaning a whole world of different things!

The trouble is that one person’s discretion is another’s grievance. Show discretion to one and another can quite reasonably get the hump along the lines of “why have I had to pay £££ for a fully flexible ticket meanwhile when someone else has been allowed to travel on here with a cheap ticket booked for another train?”.

I do sympathise with the woman at the centre of the story. Autism isn’t well understood by the populace at large, and those with mild symptoms perhaps have it worse because there isn’t anything to readily identify the issue to others, hence behaviours and issues are very likely to be misinterpreted by others. It is worth remembering though that we don’t of course know what happened, so we don’t know what her attitude was like from the off.

 

[infobleep]

I think that is highly likely yes. Or, if not that, they had tickets for the first off train after the evening peak (which would vary depending on ticket(s) held) and wanted to travel 2 hours before the evening peak cut-off (for which an excess, priced at the difference in fares, would be chargeable).

GWR do not appear to be contesting the allegations the staff behaved inappropriately as they have refunded the tickets immediately. I guess the refund was prompt because the media got involved.

In contrast, several valid passengers have been refused carriage from Paddington on the customers' contracted trains, as shown on their itinerary or reservation coupons, and GWR staff at the gateline have on at least some occasions been found to be rude when denying legitimate contracted travel. In one case where I am aware of the outcome, it took about 4 months before GWR issued a refund and apology. But no refund was going to be forthcoming until the retailer got involved!

Several GWR gateline staff at Paddington are out of control, though I do know one on this forum who is a good person who would not sneer or wrongly deny legitimate travel. But there are many more I have encountered who act inappropriately. In fact, I once witnessed an incident in which they made a false allegation a passenger held a gun, as that was the only way to get London Underground to hold a train which a legitimate ticket holder had boarded.

They are not going to change their ways anytime soon, not even this media attention will change the rotten culture there.

I've not watched all of the Channel 5 Paddington 24/7 series but does the presence of Channel 5 filming change anything with the staff at Paddington?

 

[Bantamzen]

I work with autistic children and this posts nails the challenge for the mother. She may have set off early in case of a meltdown en route and if happened to be a challenge free trip to padd as she arrived early.

I'm surprised at how many on here do not understand the challenges of autism

Not everybody does, awareness of autism has really only come into public awareness in recent times, and even then the different parts of the autistic spectrum and not fully understood by many. I have a good friend who is mildly autistic, and it took many years to fully understand his conception of the world around him, and how he developed his coping mechanisms.

 

[AlterEgo]

What’s not clear to me is why the mother thought that the best way to leave the station environment was on a train she hadn’t paid for the privilege to use, rather than just leaving the station for two hours. (Why was she even at Paddington two hours early?)

It certainly doesn’t excuse her treatment though. If that’s as reported then it’s completely unacceptable.

 

[soil]

It looks like she got free travel & first class seats as well.

https://twitter.com/sarah_hilary/status/1054413889012723713

At the same time, I should like to thank the train manager on the 6.30pm train who allowed us to sit in First Class as there were no other seats available. He was very kind and understanding (although he did say not all staff are so accommodating)

She has written in the past about lack of seat reservations:

https://twitter.com/sarah_hilary/status/1017710065141329920

Third time I’ve travelled on @GWRHelp with seat reservations for myself and my autistic teen only to find the reservations aren’t operating. You’d think the woman who took our seats would have given them up on hearing my life d needs to sit next to me but she didn’t give a fig

So I don't quite understand why you'd book a ticket for the 8:03pm/9:03pm train, presumably with seat reservations, but turn up hours early and demand seats on a train for which you have neither ticket nor seat reservations, and I think also not a direct train, but one changing at Swindon, so making things even more difficult.

It would be different had her child turned up alone, but in the scenario presented, there doesn't seem any reason to allow them on early.

Obviously the guards should be trained not to give people like this (professional complainers) cause for complaint:

https://twitter.com/sarah_hilary/status/1024862649937534976
https://twitter.com/sarah_hilary/status/992293293827342337

I suspect a large % of the RUK forums are autistic, but would be quite embarrassed to behave like this woman does: if the airline takes off in a snowstorm, it's because people want to get home. If the airline DIDN'T take off in a snowstorm she'd also be complaining bitterly.

They travel a lot on planes and trains, and that's great, and clearly for them travel is 'more difficult than average', but that's true for millions of people, and not grounds for prioritising them over and above the rest of humanity.

Guards just need to be firm but polite 'no, you have a ticket for 9:03pm, if you want to get on this train it will cost £70'.

 

[Gareth Marston]

As a news story it appears to have blown over and no one is running it today

https://transportinfo.org.uk/

We had a teenager who was clearly having a bit of a meltdown the other weekend when we had bus replacements/trains terminating here because of Storm Calum. He had a parent with him trying to calm him down he was shouting loudly and raising arms and swaying back and forth a bit- classic symptoms so after a few seconds it was obvious what the issue was to me (i use to work with people with learning disability's) - i had a colleague with me who had never seen this sort of thing before and had to explain.

However Autistic people do not come in "one size fits all" and can appear quite normal - most of the time they don't come with big signs above them saying what their condition is and whats happening to them at that moment. A parent/sibling or long term carer can often tell due to experience what maybe is happening before its readily apparent to others and its not uncommon that parents can become anxious and sometimes appear aggressive in trying to avoid/ameliorate an oncoming situation with their Child. Without witnessing the incident or seeing footage of it a plausible scenario is that the Mother has spotted the "triggers" in her child and wants to do something to avoid escalation in the child's reaction/behavior and perhaps as got a bit flustered herself (it is stressful having an autistic child and their in a big city not their home environment) and not put her case across as well as she could have to the Customer Service Staff. The child is probably at first glance to the untrained eye is behaving normally (well as normal as anyone else on the concourse) which doesn't back the Mothers case.

I do have the benefit of having worked with people with autism and have friends with autistic children what percentage of the general population does?

 

[yorkie]

She has written in the past about lack of seat reservations:
https://twitter.com/sarah_hilary/status/1017710065141329920

That is concerning; she is passing the blame onto a passenger for sitting in an unreserved seat. The sensible thing to do would be to approach the guard and politely explain her son's needs, point out she had seat reservations, and ask if there was something that could be done to accommodate them. If someone asks nicely, then most Guards would find alternative seats, which might potentially include a complimentary first class upgrade. Or it might be asking someone occupying a "priority" seat if they are able to move (that would need to be handled sensitively as the person occupying the seat might have a hidden need themselves).

Ranting against a fellow passenger who has done absolutely nothing wrong is very unfair.

But nevertheless, a demanding person who is acting unreasonably should still be dealt with in a professional manner.

 

[Cambrian359]

If the staff behaved in the described way then they should be dealt with accordingly.

But it should be asked why you would bring your child into an enviroment you know it can’t cope with 2 hours earlier than needed,a problem the parent has created but then expecting someone else to manage..

Customers have been known to make trumped up charges when they don’t get their own way,I’ve seen this happen where I work.sometimes people even get friends or family to make trumped up complaints again simply because they didn’t like the answer they got or couldn’t get their own way.(fortunately local knowledge of who’s who,police involvement,CCTV and other customers helped prove the complaint to be completely inaccurate in this instance at my work )

 

[Esker-pades]

If the staff behaved in the described way then they should be dealt with accordingly.

But it should be asked why you would bring your child into an enviroment you know it can’t cope with 2 hours earlier than needed,a problem the parent has created but then expecting someone else to manage..

Customers have been known to make trumped up charges when they don’t get their own way,I’ve seen this happen where I work.sometimes people even get friends or family to make trumped up complaints again simply because they didn’t like the answer they got or couldn’t get their own way.(fortunately local knowledge of who’s who,police involvement,CCTV and other customers helped prove the complaint to be completely inaccurate in this instance at my work )

My emphasis.

Austism really isn't that logical. There are so many factors that influence an autistic person's response to an environment. For example, her son could have coped perfectly well with the station at another point, or they were already in a poor position and the additional stress of being in a big, crowded station tipped them over the edge.

We don't know why the person was early. It could be for so many factors which are out of their control.

 

[theblackwatch]

That is concerning; she is passing the blame onto a passenger for sitting in an unreserved seat. The sensible thing to do would be to approach the guard and politely explain her son's needs, point out she had seat reservations, and ask if there was something that could be done to accommodate them. If someone asks nicely, then most Guards would find alternative seats, which might potentially include a complimentary first class upgrade. Or it might be asking someone occupying a "priority" seat if they are able to move (that would need to be handled sensitively as the person occupying the seat might have a hidden need themselves).

Ranting against a fellow passenger who has done absolutely nothing wrong is very unfair.

But nevertheless, a demanding person who is acting unreasonably should still be dealt with in a professional manner.

This does make me wonder how she actually approached staff with regard to the initial issue. While mocking someone with a problem is clearly wrong, the response from staff is probably going to be different if you are polite ("I've got a problem and was wondering if it might be possible...") to if you are less so and are more demanding.

 

[Darandio]

A serial complainer that uses the condition of her son to make complaints in order to push for compensation, innocent members of the public get scalded for no reason. She needs to sell books too. If that upsets any of you, sue me.

Before anyone brings out the old 'you don't understand' line, yes I do. I have a 16 year old nephew who is the greatest person anyone could ever meet but he can also make his mother's life a nightmare at times, she has developed ways of dealing with each individual situation. His favourite trick was when travelling and they caught a double decker, he'd go straight to the top deck and growl at anyone who had dared sit in the front seats.

That said, as someone who understands she has said that she thinks this woman is vile.

 

[soil]

My emphasis.

Austism really isn't that logical. There are so many factors that influence an autistic person's response to an environment. For example, her son could have coped perfectly well with the station at another point, or they were already in a poor position and the additional stress of being in a big, crowded station tipped them over the edge.

We don't know why the person was early. It could be for so many factors which are out of their control.

They get 1/3 off both their tickets, because the child has a disabled railcard. That saving could be used to buy a more flexible ticket. Presumably the child also gets DLA, which is intended to cover the extra costs of being disabled, as it is I think a requirement for getting the railcard.

(By the by is that both child (being 17) and mother (being 68) could also get a discounted railcard)

 

[Esker-pades]

They get 1/3 off both their tickets, because the child has a disabled railcard. That saving could be used to buy a more flexible ticket. Presumably the child also gets DLA, which is intended to cover the extra costs of being disabled, as it is I think a requirement for getting the railcard.

(By the by is that both child (being 17) and mother (being 68) could also get a discounted railcard)

Given that very few facts are actually known (which is deeply tedious), I'm not in a position to makes specific comments about this case.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That is concerning; she is passing the blame onto a passenger for sitting in an unreserved seat. The sensible thing to do would be to approach the guard and politely explain her son's needs, point out she had seat reservations, and ask if there was something that could be done to accommodate them. If someone asks nicely, then most Guards would find alternative seats, which might potentially include a complimentary first class upgrade. Or it might be asking someone occupying a "priority" seat if they are able to move (that would need to be handled sensitively as the person occupying the seat might have a hidden need themselves).

Ranting against a fellow passenger who has done absolutely nothing wrong is very unfair.

But nevertheless, a demanding person who is acting unreasonably should still be dealt with in a professional manner.

FWIW (assuming that TOC's policy was that unmarked reservations do not apply; VTWC's is that they do) I would not move out of an unmarked seat if approached rudely, regardless of need. If asked nicely I would probably move, again near enough regardless of need. If approached rudely by staff I would move but make a formal complaint about attitude afterwards.

Having a disability does not, unless it is directly caused by that disability (and as it was the mother asking it wasn't in this case) justify rudeness. Rudeness is rudeness, and rude people do not deserve any kind of accommodation beyond their precise legal entitlement.

"I'm sorry, do you mind moving to that other seat there, please? My son gets very upset if we have to sit apart" would probably be enough for me.

OTOH "You are in my seat, move or I will report you" - no chance.

There are of course degrees in between

(Note I'm talking hypothetically; as I wasn't there I have no idea if they were rude or not)

 

[soil]

A serial complainer that uses the condition of her son to make complaints in order to push for compensation, innocent members of the public get scalded for no reason. She needs to sell books too. If that upsets any of you, sue me.

It looks like the condition is quite recently diagnosed

https://twitter.com/sarah_hilary/status/927576856701947904

@ChrisGPackham thank you for your wonderful programme on living with Asperger's - inspirational and so helpful for my teenager who's struggling with recent diagnosis

8:42 AM - 6 Nov 2017

Also the son used to be a daughter, if that makes a difference.

https://twitter.com/sarah_hilary/status/470622797539328000

 

[WelshBluebird]

A serial complainer

I do find it somewhat odd that you use that as an attack on the woman.
I probably am a serial complainer to GWR, ATW (now TfW) and First Buses. Why? Because I like to complain? No. It is because I travel a lot with those companies and end up having issues very very often (I'd say something goes wrong pretty much daily, be it a delay, or a cancellation, or a toilet not working, or reservations not working etc).
The fact that someone is a "serial complainer" is more likely a reflection on the service they regularly receive, rather than a reflection on the person themselves.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I do find it somewhat odd that you use that as an attack on the woman.
I probably am a serial complainer to GWR, ATW (now TfW) and First Buses. Why? Because I like to complain? No. It is because I travel a lot with those companies and end up having issues very very often (I'd say something goes wrong pretty much daily, be it a delay, or a cancellation, or a toilet not working, or reservations not working etc).
The fact that someone is a "serial complainer" is more likely a reflection on the service they regularly receive, rather than a reflection on the person themselves.

It also doesn't help that companies are geared up to fob people off rather than to either look to resolve problems or explain honestly and openly why it isn't feasible to resolve them.

I'd happily have Delay Repay abolished in an instant if it meant I could get a proper response from a TOC of "why did it happen, is it viable to prevent it happening again, how will it be prevented, and what is the lead time". The only time I have ever had that from a TOC was the period of about a year when London Midland's Twitter was being directly operated by a senior manager in its early days.

 

[Darandio]

I do find it somewhat odd that you use that as an attack on the woman.
I probably am a serial complainer to GWR, ATW (now TfW) and First Buses. Why? Because I like to complain? No. It is because I travel a lot with those companies and end up having issues very very often (I'd say something goes wrong pretty much daily, be it a delay, or a cancellation, or a toilet not working, or reservations not working etc).
The fact that someone is a "serial complainer" is more likely a reflection on the service they regularly receive, rather than a reflection on the person themselves.

It's more to do with the use of the condition when complaining.

Thanks a bunch @easyJet @easyJetCustHelp for cancelling our flight to Glasgow overnight. Up at 3.30am only to discover no flights available now from Bristol to Glasgow today OR tomorrow. Will have to endure 7 hours on a train with unhappy autistic teen at huge expense

Will be looking for serious compensation for this. Your risible refund will not begin to cover the cost of the train tickets. And there's always the chance you'll cancel our flights home, I imagine. You wonder why people call you SleazyJet

I'd imagine everyone else on that cancelled flight was inconvenienced as well but I really don't see the need to use both his condition and the above language. Maybe it is justified, maybe she just has a life of inconvenience.