• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Strictly Come Dancing
Natalie Lowe parks in disabled bay two days running
<<
<
8 of 8
>>
>
duckylucky
05-12-2016
Originally Posted by katmobile:
“Ok two points here then I'm done.

One - is that for what I've seen it's not uncommon practice for hotels to let you park in front of them briefly to drop off bags this one's set up is unusual in that the place in front of the hotel is probably the disabled bays.

Two - no I don't have extensive experience in dealing with people with disablities but my husband's knees disolate sometimes randomly. Not the same thing right? Yes I'd agree but the strange thing is that he is a keen runner and has run the London marathan and a lot of half marathons and 20k runs to the extent where sometimes I feel like a bit of a running widow. Not relevant right?

I don't know but you see there is possibly a very good reason to extend Nat the benefit of the doubt and ironically for all the if it were Ola diatribe it would also extend to Ola too. That is that we do know for a fact that Nat has previously been seriously injured - this could be moonshine but hubbie's example illustrates it might not be. You see the human body can be strange - hubbie's knees have never dislocated whilst he's done an official run - weird right? The point I'm making is that just because Nat's back has healed enough for her to dance again doesn't automatically mean it's healed enough for her to lug heavy bags across a car park or maybe because it's her career she considers dancing an acceptable risk but not bag lugging. Also do we know what strained it so badly in the first place - might be relevant here. It may also explain why she doesn't want to comment in that it might make the management of SCD doubt her fitness to carry on working.”

I am also done after this . If your husbands merits a blue badge then fine . If Natalie merits a blue badge then also fine . Then she should apply for one and if she merits one then display it
Until she does then don't park there
Bonnie2012
05-12-2016
Originally Posted by duckylucky:
“I am also done after this . If your husbands merits a blue badge then fine . If Natalie merits a blue badge then also fine . Then she should apply for one and if she merits one then display it
Until she does then don't park there”

A passing thought:
Has anyone confirmed whether or not there was a badge displayed
Another passing thought:
Has anyone confirmed it to be Natalie's car?
katmobile
06-12-2016
Originally Posted by Bonnie2012:
“A passing thought:
Has anyone confirmed whether or not there was a badge displayed
Another passing thought:
Has anyone confirmed it to be Natalie's car?”

You can only see the back of the car in the photo in the link here also throwing mud at Will Young and I don't know about the other photo but there's nothing to show it's her car in that photo either.
Domestos
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by katmobile:
“You can only see the back of the car in the photo in the link here also throwing mud at Will Young and I don't know about the other photo but there's nothing to show it's her car in that photo either.”

In one of the articles it clearly shows the car side on with her taking stuff out of the boot. So yes, it's her car or she was driving it at least.
Chiltons Cane
07-12-2016
Stop trying to defend her. She parked there twice. No excuse for it.
duckylucky
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Domestos:
“In one of the articles it clearly shows the car side on with her taking stuff out of the boot. So yes, it's her car or she was driving it at least.”

Yes clearly she was driving it so its her responsibilty to park it appropriately . No excuse at all for it . Its pure bad manners at the very least
Three Left Feet
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by katmobile:
“The point I'm making is that just because Nat's back has healed enough for her to dance again doesn't automatically mean it's healed enough for her to lug heavy bags across a car park.”

I jiggered my back badly a few years ago. It was sufficiently bad that I couldn't walk properly for a few weeks and couldn't lift my kids (aged 3 and 2 at the time). So, I'd conclude it was in a far worse state than Nat's if she can still dance. But even when I was at my most crocked, it never occurred to me to use disable parking bays. I just allowed for things taking more time than normal and asked folk (e.g. supermarket staff, workers at the kids' nursery etc.) to do the "heavy lifting" for me. This worked fine, though it was obvious I was quite badly crocked.

So not much sympathy for Nat from me, I'm afraid.
lundavra
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by duckylucky:
“Yes clearly she was driving it so its her responsibilty to park it appropriately . No excuse at all for it . Its pure bad manners at the very least”

If there are a number of bays marked disabled in a private car park and none or few are in use then it seems quite reasonable for the owner of the car park to allow people to use some, particularly for loading, provided they know there will always be some available for disabled customers.
katmobile
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Chiltons Cane:
“Stop trying to defend her. She parked there twice. No excuse for it.”

So what am I supposed to do here - just make the same assumptions that everyone else has that she's a selfish so and so who parked there for three hours like the tabloids said despite the fact she's actually partnered someone with a disability and it seems to run counter to the impression of the nice person I got from elsewhere? That doesn't seem to make sense to me. Also three hours on a rehearsal day for SCD really when she would have had to travelled from elsewhere to make a stay a hotel worthwhile - like seriously guys? That doesn't make sense to me either.

I can believe a hotel allowed someone to use a disabled parking bay to load cases and check in and maybe grab a coffee especially since you can see from the photos that there is actually a free disabled parking bay on the other side of the other parked car. Beyond that no sorry I just can't - decided if you will I've no sympathy for the plight of the disabled if you will but I can't do it especially by what the press have said because they never lie and exaggerate things do they?

Pardon me if I don't think she's the devil incarnate despite the fact that I've never used a disabled parking bay in my life or even considered it.
Bonnie2012
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by lundavra:
“If there are a number of bays marked disabled in a private car park and none or few are in use then it seems quite reasonable for the owner of the car park to allow people to use some, particularly for loading, provided they know there will always be some available for disabled customers.”

At the end of the day, if it's a private car park, it's up to the owner of it who is allowed to use it, not the Daily Mail nor anybody else.
duckylucky
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by lundavra:
“If there are a number of bays marked disabled in a private car park and none or few are in use then it seems quite reasonable for the owner of the car park to allow people to use some, particularly for loading, provided they know there will always be some available for disabled customers.”

It clearly states no parking except for blue badge holders . Thats enough for me to not park there and never will ( unless of course I need a blue badge one day )
Ellie1967
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by katmobile:
“So what am I supposed to do here - just make the same assumptions that everyone else has that she's a selfish so and so who parked there for three hours like the tabloids said despite the fact she's actually partnered someone with a disability and it seems to run counter to the impression of the nice person I got from elsewhere? That doesn't seem to make sense to me. Also three hours on a rehearsal day for SCD really when she would have had to travelled from elsewhere to make a stay a hotel worthwhile - like seriously guys? That doesn't make sense to me either.

I can believe a hotel allowed someone to use a disabled parking bay to load cases and check in and maybe grab a coffee especially since you can see from the photos that there is actually a free disabled parking bay on the other side of the other parked car. Beyond that no sorry I just can't - decided if you will I've no sympathy for the plight of the disabled if you will but I can't do it especially by what the press have said because they never lie and exaggerate things do they?

Pardon me if I don't think she's the devil incarnate despite the fact that I've never used a disabled parking bay in my life or even considered it.”

I agree with all of this. As for the 'source' saying she was there for three hours etc.. I remember a story the DM ran when Kara and Artem were on the show, with pictures of them (not in the same shot) outside her flat saying a 'source' had seen them having a row and she had been pulling at her hair in anger and shouting across the street at him. Kara later tweeted that the photos had been taken at different times and Artem wasn't even there when she was actually talking to someone completely different and tightening her ponytail rather than pulling at her hair in anger. So, even though the photos show Natalie in a disabled bay I wouldn't necessarily believe the 'source' about anything or completely condemn her without knowing the circumstances, such as who she was with etc.
Ann_Dancer
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Ellie1967:
“I agree with all of this. As for the 'source' saying she was there for three hours etc.. I remember a story the DM ran when Kara and Artem were on the show, with pictures of them (not in the same shot) outside her flat saying a 'source' had seen them having a row and she had been pulling at her hair in anger and shouting across the street at him. Kara later tweeted that the photos had been taken at different times and Artem wasn't even there when she was actually talking to someone completely different and tightening her ponytail rather than pulling at her hair in anger. So, even though the photos show Natalie in a disabled bay I wouldn't necessarily believe the 'source' about anything or completely condemn her without knowing the circumstances, such as who she was with etc.”

Except that Natalie hasn't corrected the story despite being questioned about it by a number of disabled people on Twitter.

I don't think she should be hanged drawn and quartered over this, and maybe the discussion should be laid to rest. However, I'm surprised at the convoluted arguments people are coming up with to suggest she did nothing wrong. And to be honest, that's what is keeping this thread going.
Ellie1967
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Ann_Dancer:
“Except that Natalie hasn't corrected the story despite being questioned about it by a number of disabled people on Twitter.

I don't think she should be hanged drawn and quartered over this, and maybe the discussion should be laid to rest. However, I'm surprised at the convoluted arguments people are coming up with to suggest she did nothing wrong. And to be honest, that's what is keeping this thread going.”

I get that, but I'm not someone who thinks everything is true unless it's denied on social media either. A lot of people were prepared to give Will the benefit of the doubt even though he didn't explain why he left the show on Twitter etc.

I'm not trying to suggest she did nothing wrong, but I guess I just don't view it as black and white as some on here. Although I haven't ever parked in a disabled bay, to me it isn't as bad to stop in one in a private car park for a few minutes to unload bags, with the permission of the hotel, when there are other disabled bays free, than it would be to park in one in a supermarket for hours while you go off and do your shopping. I don't know which end of that spectrum Natalie falls under as I don't know the circumstances, but I can equally understand why other people view it as completely unacceptable however long she was there.
DiamondDoll
07-12-2016
Eight pages

Just this

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....4,203,200_.jpg
lundavra
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Ann_Dancer:
“Except that Natalie hasn't corrected the story despite being questioned about it by a number of disabled people on Twitter.

I don't think she should be hanged drawn and quartered over this, and maybe the discussion should be laid to rest. However, I'm surprised at the convoluted arguments people are coming up with to suggest she did nothing wrong. And to be honest, that's what is keeping this thread going.”

People are often advised not to respond to things like this in the tabloids because every question answered will lead to another question and they have no guarantee that their answer will be quoted accurately.
lundavra
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Ellie1967:
“I get that, but I'm not someone who thinks everything is true unless it's denied on social media either. A lot of people were prepared to give Will the benefit of the doubt even though he didn't explain why he left the show on Twitter etc.

I'm not trying to suggest she did nothing wrong, but I guess I just don't view it as black and white as some on here. Although I haven't ever parked in a disabled bay, to me it isn't as bad to stop in one in a private car park for a few minutes to unload bags, with the permission of the hotel, when there are other disabled bays free, than it would be to park in one in a supermarket for hours while you go off and do your shopping. I don't know which end of that spectrum Natalie falls under as I don't know the circumstances, but I can equally understand why other people view it as completely unacceptable however long she was there.”

With the preponderance of cameras now in phones, windscreens, CCTV etc it is becoming common for images to be sold to the tabloids and calls for the police to prosecute people when there is actually nothing that could be used in court.

I normally park just at the end of one of the disabled parking areas in my local supermarket. There are frequently (nearly always) vehicles without disabled badges parked in them, often vans motorhomes, and pickups, I have quick look at the windscreen as I walk past. The supermarket don't take any action of course, the law in Scotland is supposed to be changing but I can't imagine the police taking any interest.
marieantoinette
07-12-2016
I can't help but feel that if there were a simple explanation as posters are suggesting, Natalie would have put it on twitter. She has nothing to lose and everything to gain. I comment as one whose 90 year old dad has a blue badge and cannot get out without it. If he can't find a disabled space, he has to go home.
katmobile
07-12-2016
Originally Posted by marieantoinette:
“I can't help but feel that if there were a simple explanation as posters are suggesting, Natalie would have put it on twitter. She has nothing to lose and everything to gain. I comment as one whose 90 year old dad has a blue badge and cannot get out without it. If he can't find a disabled space, he has to go home.”

there could be a variety of reasons why not. Implicating the hotel and also she might have to think very carefully about what she does say here. Also it would depend on the tone of the question being asked - it's difficult to reply to 'how could you?' however justified that question is.
komentaightor
07-12-2016
In the Godforsaken country that used to be called England, but nowadays is known as Beyond The Pale, would it not be a good idea for supermarkets and shops to have 2-minute loading-unloading bays at the front of their shops like they have in civilised countries?

In recent years, whenever back in the UK with a car, I look with despair at all the yellow paint that has been dribbled onto tarmac road surfaces and wonder why the Tate Modern has not seized on this as a new art form. I'm surprised drivers are even allowed to get our of their cars at petrol stations to refuel.
<<
<
8 of 8
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map