Court of Appeal upholds landmark disability access case
20 Nov 2009: The Court of Appeal today upheld the rights of an 18-year-old wheelchair user to have access to in-branch banking services in the case of David Allen v the Royal Bank of Scotland.
The Royal Bank of Scotland had - until now – refused to carry out work to make access possible for wheelchair users like David Allen at their branch at Church St, Sheffield.
In dismissing the bank’s appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the order of His Honour Judge Dowse on 16th January 2009 at Sheffield County Court, where he ruled that the bank had breached the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The judge granted an injunction against the bank, requiring them to carry out the necessary work to allow access for wheelchair users. He rejected an argument that David could and should use internet banking instead, ruling that it was not the same service.
This was the first time a court had granted an injunction under the Disability Discrimination Act requiring building works.
Speaking after today’s judgement, David said,
“I’m glad the bank finally had to apologise in court and acknowledge they treated me badly.”
“But I am still very disappointed that RBS (who I have banked with since I was 10 when I was still able to walk) would not willingly comply with the Disability Discrimination Law and provide wheelchair access which not only I, but many of their other customers with disabilities need.”
“They just failed to understand anything about the need for privacy and dignity.”
Sheffield Law Centre helped David take his case successfully to Sheffield County Court to prove that the bank could reasonably have provided access.
In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Wall said,
“The Claimant wanted to use counter facilities which the Bank offered as part of its services at its main branch in Sheffield. The claimant could not access those facilities, and in my judgment a duty on the part of the Bank plainly arose.”
The judgement of the Court of Appeal stresses that service providers must provide a service as close as possible to what the general public gets. The bank had argued that disabled people did not actually need to get into its branches. In his judgement, Lord Justice Dyson pointed out that customers have the choice of face-to-face banking – otherwise the bank would not maintain it 2300 branches. He said:
“The public at large have physical access to banks in order to make use of traditional counter banking services and the Bank’s non-disabled customers have physical access to all of its branches, including the main branch. The judge was entitled to conclude that the provision of the alternative methods of making those banking services available that were relied on by the Bank were not a reasonable alternative”
Douglas Johnson of Sheffield Law Centre helped David bring the case. David was represented in the court by Catherine Casserley and Robin Allen QC. The case was supported by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The Commission produces a statutory Code of Practice to provide guidance to service providers. The Court of Appeal noted that courts must take this Code into account when looking at access cases under the Disability Discrimination Act.
Describing why he had to take action, David said,
“I only wanted them to comply with the law and provide access so I could get into my bank like my friends.”
Ceri Allen, David’s mother, had to bring the case on his behalf because he was under 18 when it started. In response to the court judgement, she said,
“This is just such good news for disabled people.”
“RBS claim to take disability issues seriously. They actually told the court that David received better treatment than other customers because they allowed David to carry out banking transactions in the street.”
“It is surprising how many people assume that all big businesses have automatically complied with the Disability Discrimination Law. The everyday reality for wheelchair users is that level access or lifts are still all too often not available.”
“The only reason we brought the claim was because they thought they could ignore us. Then they tried to bully us. Big organisations think they can buy their way out instead of answering complaints of discrimination. They never seemed to understand that we weren’t after money. It was simply an issue about access to the bank. They’ll never get it right until they actually listen to people with disabilities.
Douglas Johnson of Sheffield Law Centre represented David. He said,
“This judgement sets out a very clear and simple formula for courts to follow in future cases. It will make it easier and simpler for courts to deal with complaints of discrimination from disabled people in the future.”
“I found it hard to believe the bank actually argued that David was getting a better service by doing his banking in the street and I was disappointed that the bank refused to accept the judgement of His Honour Judge Dowse. The bank has avoided creating access for as long as it can so I am very pleased we have a clear message from the Court of Appeal.”
“This judgement should encourage the bank to review its national access programme. It must talk to people about their everyday needs. The real access issue is about people and attitudes, not ramps and steps. This ruling should start to bring real benefits to disabled and non-disabled customers.”
NOTES TO EDITORS
Press contact:
Douglas Johnson in Sheffield 0114 273 1501;
1. The Court of Appeal dismissed the bank’s appeal and ordered the bank to install wheelchair access to the branch and pay an additional £3000 for the delay.
2. David Allen has banked at the Church St, Sheffield branch of RBS since he was at primary school. Now he uses a wheelchair, he cannot get into the branch at all. As a result, he had to do his banking on the street, despite the Disability Discrimination Act requiring the bank to take reasonable adjustments to their branch. He found this degrading and humiliating.
3. The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 prohibits discrimination related to a disability in the fields of employment, education, goods facilities and services (GFS) and public authority functions. Part 3 of the Act also requires service providers to make “reasonable adjustments” to their services so as to provide as close a service as possible to that provided to other members of the public. Service providers may have to make adjustments to their policies or practices, as well as to any physical barriers on their premises.
4. Disabled people who have been discriminated against unlawfully can bring a complaint in their local county court. Where discrimination has occurred, county courts have the power to award compensation for “injury to feelings” – this is to cover humiliation, embarrassment, inconvenience and stress, even where there has been no financial loss. The Employment Tribunal hears complaints of disability discrimination in the employment field.
5. Employment tribunals receive 5,500 complaints of disability discrimination a year. By contrast, very few complaints have ever been brought in the county courts. In the years 1996 to 2004, research indicates that fewer than 100 cases in total had ever been brought to a court.
6. The Royal Bank of Scotland Group (which includes the NatWest) currently has about 2276 branches in the UK. The bank’s pre-tax profits for 2006-07 were £9,414 million. The RBS handles 14,000 accounts at its church St, Sheffield branch.
7. An estimated 20% of the population have a disability (within the definition in the Disability Discrimination Act). Only about 4% of disabled people use wheelchairs.
8. His Honour Judge Dowse gave judgement in favour of David Allen on 16th January 2009. He gave a declaration that RBS had discriminated against David Allen contrary to s.19(1)(b) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 – the “reasonable adjustment” duty. He also ordered the bank to install a platform lift, as detailed in an expert report before the court, no later than 30 September 2009 and awarded damages for injury to feelings of £6,500, plus interest. The cost of the works was estimated at £200,000. This is the first known case where a court has granted a mandatory injunction under the DDA requiring building work to address physical features.
9. “Injury to feelings” is the legal term for the frustration, insult, inconvenience, embarrassment, stigma, etc of suffering unjustified discrimination.
10. Sheffield Law Centre is an independent registered charity and provides specialist legal advice in housing, employment, immigration and asylum and discrimination law. There are 56 law centres altogether in the UK, supported by the Law Centres Federation.
Sheffield Law Centre is at Waverley House, 10 Joiner Street, Sheffield S3 8GW.
Public advice line: 0114 273 1888
For further information on this press release, please contact Douglas Johnson at Sheffield Law Centre.
E-mail ,
Tel: 0114 273 1501
Fax 0114 279 7778.
Website: http://www.slc.org.uk
