Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave

Unless BA had been willing to find you an alternative option at the time, I don't see the need to compromise. The guidelines they put in place are purely of BA's making, and while I can see this actually is very sensible (given the number of "what is reasonable" questions we see here and most people are perhaps able to adapt to the circumstances better), it actually has nothing to do with your entitlements under the Regulation. There are no specific limits in the Regulation, moreover BA failed in their Right of Care responsibilities. On top of that, there is a very specific clause in the Regulation that underlines the importance of Right of Care to those with disabilities, which admittedly is non specific, but if it had to be specifically applied then it would be on something like this. Ditto food and transport, incidentally.

If this got to court, I'm 100% sure this would not get past initial pleadings. Which, of course, is why it won't get to court.