Ride Access Pass and Disabled Access - 2026 Discussion

[RIPCorky]

I mean, the funny thing about disabilities is that they tend to be with you for your life. Unless they can regrow limbs or rewire/repair the brain.


I'm surprised they didn't wait until after half term to make a decision. But we're just back to square 1 again where people will be fighting to book trips instead. And thus the never ending circle of complaints will continue.

No what I mean is I doubt people decide they're not going to visit Merlin theme parks. Rather than "I don't think I'm disabled now"

 

[John]

The user stated: "I see people taking advantage of the RAP all the time."

Unless they possess access to private medical records, they can't "see" whether someone is taking advantage of RAP. They're seeing a person who looks able bodied skipping a queue, and assuming abuse.

They can certainly see people openly discussing how they cheat the system by using it to queue for multiple rides simultaneously, either by the use of multiple time cards for a single group or by using a mix of RAP and main queues

 

[Alphe86]

I mean, the funny thing about disabilities is that they tend to be with you for your life. Unless they can regrow limbs or rewire/repair the brain.


I'm surprised they didn't wait until after half term to make a decision. But we're just back to square 1 again where people will be fighting to book trips instead. And thus the never ending circle of complaints will continue.

Just because you can. Doesn’t mean you should. But I guess you can’t trust people to do the right thing.
Eg: my son needs it 100%.
I’m also eligible (autistic and early on set Parkinson’s disease) but I manage the main queue mostly fine so don’t use it at all.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

They can certainly see people openly discussing how they cheat the system

Aside from the impressive observational lip reading abilities it must take to discern the nuances of a complex RAP strategy from a different queue line... there is a distinct difference between "seeing people cheat" and "overhearing people discuss how they navigate a broken system."

either by the use of multiple time cards for a single group

If a group contains two disabled guests, they are contractually entitled to two time cards. If they choose to use those entitlements concurrently to ride Nemesis and Galactica back to back, that's not cheating; that's two individuals exercising their independent rights to reasonable adjustments. The fact that they are friends or family does not void their individual eligibility.

by using a mix of RAP and main queues

The infamous "double dipping" is less a case of masterful deception and more a case of operational incompetence. Even if Merlin's RAP T&Cs explicitly prohibited entering a physical queue during a timeout (which, to be clear, they do not), the fact that it is technically possible is a failure of system design, not a grand deception.

Your gotcha logic relies on the false assumption that disability is a binary state: either you can queue for everything, or you can queue for nothing. In reality, it is a question of threshold.

Consider a priority seat on a train. A person with chronic pain might be able to stand for a 5 minute hop between stations, but physically can't sustain a 90 minute commute. If that person chooses to stand for the short journey, they aren't "cheating" the other passengers; they're simply managing their own condition.

Similarly, joining a 5 minute walk on queue for The Curse at Alton Manor whilst on a timeout doesn't contradict a guest's need for assistance on a 90 minute Smiler queue. It actively demonstrates that they are only using the accommodation when the barrier (time / crowds) exceeds their physical or neurological limit.

Accusing someone of "cheating" for not using a disability aid when the environment doesn't demand it is absurd. The adjustment is there to mitigate a specific harm (the long queue); if the harm is absent, the adjustment is unnecessary. That's not abuse, it's the system functioning precisely as it was configured.

If the current design creates an operational imbalance or an "unfair advantage," then the mechanism itself requires review, not the morality of the guest. It's fundamentally unjust to accuse those who are utilising the platform exactly as it was designed of "cheating".

 

[venny]

Not really either or is it? Just because you operate within the system doesn’t mean you’re following the spirit of it. That might not strictly be “cheating” the system, but it feels like at least playing the system. That’s just semantics though.

 

[Bowser]

If a group contains two disabled guests, they are contractually entitled to two time cards. If they choose to use those entitlements concurrently to ride Nemesis and Galactica back to back, that's not cheating; that's two individuals exercising their independent rights to reasonable adjustments. The fact that they are friends or family does not void their individual eligibility

This aspect is somewhat down to interpretation:

At the UK Resorts, misuse of the RAP includes, but is not limited to;

• Attempting to use multiple timecards at once where a timecard system is in use.

I think most people would quite reasonably consider this misuse of the system. It’s poor ethics either way as you’re knowingly depriving others of slots and gaming a system to gain an advantage over other guests.

 

[Smiley]

So the current system, which everyone agrees doesn't work, continues.... I think it's a sad day when 25k people sign a petition, yet I haven't heard a single solution (certainly not reported by the BBC). I imagine next we'll have 1-2 hour RAP "queues" and people will be complaining they can't "queue" that long either. Why they didn't at least introduce +1 only and 1 ride/attraction/day I have no idea.

I'm not planning on visiting Merlin this year so we'll see what shakes out. Just sad to see Merlin row back on this so early - they must have known the backlash was coming.... I fear that now it's been well publicised even more unscrupulous people will apply for RAP, and the situation will get worse.

I don't see this as a win for anyone.

 

[venny]

So the current system, which everyone agrees doesn't work, continues.... I think it's a sad day when 25k people sign a petition, yet I haven't heard a single solution (certainly not reported by the BBC). I imagine next we'll have 1-2 hour RAP "queues" and people will be complaining they can't "queue" that long either. Why they didn't at least introduce +1 only and 1 ride/attraction/day I have no idea.

I'm not planning on visiting Merlin this year so we'll see what shakes out. Just sad to see Merlin row back on this so early - they must have known the backlash was coming.... I fear that now it's been well publicised even more unscrupulous people will apply for RAP, and the situation will get worse.

I don't see this as a win for anyone.

Very good point this. The backlash is already well-publicised. This feels like mismanaged capitulation.

About par for the course for Merlin I suppose.

 

[RIPCorky]

So the current system, which everyone agrees doesn't work, continues.... I think it's a sad day when 25k people sign a petition, yet I haven't heard a single solution (certainly not reported by the BBC). I imagine next we'll have 1-2 hour RAP "queues" and people will be complaining they can't "queue" that long either. Why they didn't at least introduce +1 only and 1 ride/attraction/day I have no idea.

I'm not planning on visiting Merlin this year so we'll see what shakes out. Just sad to see Merlin row back on this so early - they must have known the backlash was coming.... I fear that now it's been well publicised even more unscrupulous people will apply for RAP, and the situation will get worse.

I don't see this as a win for anyone.

Indeed and when people apply now they'll be making sure they get every single badge on their card to future proof against something like this again.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

This aspect is somewhat down to interpretation:

At the UK Resorts, misuse of the RAP includes, but is not limited to;

• Attempting to use multiple timecards at once where a timecard system is in use.

I think most people would quite reasonably consider this misuse of the system. It’s poor ethics either way as you’re knowingly depriving others of slots and gaming a system to gain an advantage over other guests.

Your interpretation of this rule is, with respect, incorrect. This clause is designed to prevent a single group from using multiple RAP cards to exceed the "passholder + 3 companions" limit for one ride, at once. It prevents a group of six from using two cards, at once, to board the same train, for example.

It's not, and has never been, intended to prevent two separate, eligible individuals from independently exercising their right to a reasonable adjustment on two separate rides at the same time.

Each disabled individual is assessed and granted a RAP based on their own personal need. This is their individual reasonable adjustment, a right enshrined under the Equality Act. The suggestion (made by others, not you @Bowser) that their right to this adjustment is somehow nullified or suspended simply because they choose to visit a park with another disabled person is logically incoherent and, I would argue, discriminatory. It's the equivalent of saying that two wheelchair users can't visit the park together, because only one of them is allowed to use a ramp at any given time.

Merlin's own guidance explicitly confirms this. In their own FAQ regarding the new digital system, they state:

Each device allows one RAP pre-booking, which can include up to 3 guests. Everyone in the party must have their own pre-book, so a family of 4 must have 4 pre-books in total. This ensures all RAP users in the party can make use of the RAP system while optimising our RAP capacity for other guests who rely on the system too.

https://support.merlinannualpass.co.uk/hc/en-us/articles/33696099899805-Can-I-use-the-Ride-Access-Pass-app-for-my-whole-group

The key phrase here is "all RAP users in the party". The system is not only designed to accommodate this, it is structured to ensure it happens by requiring each RAP holder to have their own separate pre-booking, on their own device.

The system isn't being gamed. Two disabled people are simply using the accessibility tools they have been individually and legitimately granted. The ethics of the situation are clear: each individual retains their right to access, regardless of who they choose to spend their day with.

 

[Alphe86]

So the current system, which everyone agrees doesn't work, continues.... I think it's a sad day when 25k people sign a petition, yet I haven't heard a single solution (certainly not reported by the BBC). I imagine next we'll have 1-2 hour RAP "queues" and people will be complaining they can't "queue" that long either. Why they didn't at least introduce +1 only and 1 ride/attraction/day I have no idea.

I'm not planning on visiting Merlin this year so we'll see what shakes out. Just sad to see Merlin row back on this so early - they must have known the backlash was coming.... I fear that now it's been well publicised even more unscrupulous people will apply for RAP, and the situation will get worse.

I don't see this as a win for anyone.

Except with the numbers limited per day last year we didn’t get long RAP queues?

 

[Graeme]

Going to just say this and get my head bitten off.

I think Merlin had it right. There are so many people that don’t like crowds for various reasons.

Now I don’t see Footbal matches/Concerts etc offering tickets to people that allow them to “be away from crowds” and enjoy the event. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

So I can’t imagine this is a concession that Merlin have to offer.

 

[Bowser]

Your interpretation of this rule is, with respect, incorrect. This clause is designed to prevent a single group from using multiple RAP cards to exceed the "passholder + 3 companions" limit for one ride, at once. It prevents a group of six from using two cards, at once, to board the same train, for example.

It's not, and has never been, intended to prevent two separate, eligible individuals from independently exercising their right to a reasonable adjustment on two separate rides at the same time.

Each disabled individual is assessed and granted a RAP based on their own personal need. This is their individual reasonable adjustment, a right enshrined under the Equality Act. The suggestion (made by others, not you @Bowser) that their right to this adjustment is somehow nullified or suspended simply because they choose to visit a park with another disabled person is logically incoherent and, I would argue, discriminatory. It's the equivalent of saying that two wheelchair users can't visit the park together, because only one of them is allowed to use a ramp at any given time.

Merlin's own guidance explicitly confirms this. In their own FAQ regarding the new digital system, they state:

The key phrase here is "all RAP users in the party". The system is not only designed to accommodate this, it is structured to ensure it happens by requiring each RAP holder to have their own separate pre-booking, on their own device.

The system isn't being gamed. Two disabled people are simply using the accessibility tools they have been individually and legitimately granted. The ethics of the situation are clear: each individual retains their right to access, regardless of who they choose to spend their day with.

I think you're ignoring the real life implications.

A group of 4 have 2 RAP users. You're suggesting that each user will then select + 1 and their party of 4 is represented? Others are suggesting some users will (and have) both selected +3 and thus will be joining queues during the time out of one another's cards. The group of 4 are using 8 RAP slots in this scenario and not abiding by the time outs.

Realistically there's no way to stop this (other than the difficulty of obtaining that many slots for the same day in the first place) beyond requiring your guests to also have log-ins. Is this a widespread issue? I don't know and i'm not sure anyone does beyond anecdotes though technically Merlin will have the data if it has been happening on the digital systems.

I appreciate the example group may also wish to split up and use different attractions so there is fair use of multiple RAP's within a single party to consider.

Also if 4 people are using 8 RAP slots then there are fewer users on site, so whilst frustrating for those who cannot get a slot, the on site experience might be slightly better for all guests.

 

[NuttySquirrel]

What's frustrating about Merlin's attempt to crack down on eligibility and then the inevitable U-turn is that they're acting like they've tried everything and this was a desperate last resort. There is much more they can do to improve the scheme and had even started to implement some positive changes - switching Thorpe Park and Alton Towers to a digital system that's much less open to abuse, for example. They had also made changes to the booking system so you cannot book dates months and months in advance anymore.

There were other limitations they could have applied as well without mucking about with eligibility and being accused of discrimination. It's always seemed odd to me that up to 75% of the RAP queue was made up of non-disabled companions. One essential companion seems sufficient to me. Limiting the numbers of times you can use the pass each day would also be more likely to give those using the scheme an equivalent number of rides to everyone else - although a well-managed digital queuing system might have a similar effect.

It's not contentious to offer an accessibility scheme with limited capacity. It is contentiousness to arbitrarily gatekeep what types of disability you're prepared to accommodate. I honestly don't know why they thought that was the way they needed to go.

 

[Wilko]

I can’t see there ever being a correct answer here, and by doing this u-turn they will more than likely go back on whatever they decide to do next as well when people kick up a fuss.

I personally think that for young families it needs to be more than +1 per RAP user as you’re more likely to have a couple of kids you can’t split up but need to ride with. It can potentially be looked at for over 16s maybe.

With the Access Card database I’d imagine you can check addresses too and maybe limit it to one per household on any given day. That would stop families that have 2 RAP users for example being able to take 8 people in a queue, which you can in its current guise.

 

[AltonLover123]

They can certainly see people openly discussing how they cheat the system by using it to queue for multiple rides simultaneously, either by the use of multiple time cards for a single group or by using a mix of RAP and main queues

Also, the amount of times I’ve been at a merge point and heard the host ask “fastrack or rap”, the rap user says “fast track” and pulls out a rap timesheet and then the host having to spend 10 minutes explaining why they’re adding 60 minutes timeout onto the card.

The amount of times I’ve seen rap users pull out a blank time card and gloating they’ll be walking straight onto the next ride after having the other signed.

Lots of people deserve and need rap. But, a lot also abuse the system. It doesn’t mean they didn’t qualify, it means they’ve figured out a way to abuse the system.

The app should curb some of the above but it won’t solve it completely.

 

[Benjsh]

I knew there would be a U turn but didnt expect it before half term even got going. Hahaha.

Made my mind up for me though at least. Either a quiet off peak day visit or no visits at all this year for Merlin yet again.
Not a cat in hells chance im going anywhere near these parks on a busy day. Just not worth the money and effort anymore.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

A group of 4 have 2 RAP users. You're suggesting that each user will then select + 1 and their party of 4 is represented? Others are suggesting some users will (and have) both selected +3 and thus will be joining queues during the time out of one another's cards. The group of 4 are using 8 RAP slots in this scenario and not abiding by the time outs.

This is imprecise. A group of four, by virtue of having two eligible members, doesn't magically occupy eight physical spaces in the park, or eight pre-book spaces. They're using two legitimate entitlements serially. The issue isn't that they are breaking the rules; the issue is that they're operating the system exactly as it has been designed.

This isn't a story of widespread user malice; it's a story of predictable user behaviour meeting a system with a glaring, exploitable design flaw. This brings us directly to the plethora of sensible, non-discriminatory solutions that were, of course, entirely ignored.

It's always seemed odd to me that up to 75% of the RAP queue was made up of non-disabled companions. One essential companion seems sufficient to me.

I personally think that for young families it needs to be more than +1 per RAP user as you’re more likely to have a couple on kids you can split up but need to ride with. It can potentially be looked at for over 16s maybe

Both of these are acceptable and well argued suggestions of elements of control. They do not infringe on the rights of the disabled, they play no attempt at top trumps, no one is accusing anybody of anything untoward.

However, I disagree @NuttySquirrel's other suggestion of an artificial ride limit. Whilst superficially appealing, it introduces a new form of inequity. A casual visitor has no cap on their potential ride count; to impose one on a disabled guest is to create a new, artificial barrier. The goal is equitable access, not a rationed experience.

The only other robust solution is to dismantle the commercial "pay to play" assessment model and bring the process back in house.

Some members here often wonder why the rest of the world doesn't appear to have the same level of apparent oversubscription to accessibility as the UK. The rest of the world doesn't have Nimbus.

We need a return to human assessment based on clinical evidence, not just bureaucratic paperwork. This means requiring supporting statements from recognised professional bodies, occupational therapists, SENCOs, specialist consultants, rather than relying on a DWP letter (which proves financial status, not physical capacity) or a commercial entity incentivised to say "yes".

Sadly, this requires significant internal investment, something which seems alien to the current Merlin administration.

We are, after all, discussing a company that has effectively outsourced the Entertainments half of its own name. Expecting them to suddenly reverse course and bring a complex, high liability administrative process back in house is, I fear, optimistic to the point of delusion.

 

[Ash]

They have uploaded a video now as well;


From: https://youtu.be/n3SWM7njQd0?si=pTg37t6l5dH-sv3y

Knowingly openly advertising you have created and provide something not fit for purpose…

Farcical