DWP discriminates against blind woman

Angela Sharrock is registered blind. In 2006, the DWP received an anonymous complaint about her and spent several months investigating her, both with secret surveillance and with taped interviews. Her income support entitlement was stopped in February 2007. With advice and representation from Manor Rights and Advice Service in Sheffield, she took her case to an independent appeal tribunal, which ruled against the DWP. However, the DWP repeatedly failed to put its letters and legal documents into an accessible format that she could read, despite admissions at Sheffield county court that it was able to do so. This was in breach of the duty under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to make reasonable adjustments to its usual services by providing an auxiliary service.

At Sheffield County Court, District Judge Mort said that other members of the public “would get letters and would be able to read those letters and act on them and decide whether or not they needed advice.” Relying on the statutory Code of Practice, he said that, “the aim of the duty to make reasonable adjustments is to provide access as close as possible to the way in which access is normally offered to the public at large.”

He found that the DWP’s failure to comply with its own practices caused Miss Sharrock inconvenience, effort, discomfort, anxiety and loss of dignity. However, he found that her upset was “partially due” to the DWP’s treatment of her in the taped interviews. As these occurred before the relevant sections of the law came into force on 4th December 2006, he could not take them into account in awarding compensation.

After the hearing, Angela Sharrock said,

“I have always been as independent as I can. I feel ashamed when I have to ask for help. Doing something simple like putting my letters in a large print size would make it much easier for me to keep my independence.”

Douglas Johnson, who represented Miss Sharrock, said:

“The court was limited to the complaint only about the DWP’s correspondence. However, Miss Sharrock had earlier complaints about the handling of the anonymous complaint about her. She found the investigator to be abusive and to have made inappropriate comments about her disability. These matters were not taken to court because the relevant legal provision came into force on 4th December 2006, which was after the investigation had taken place. The DWP will have to ensure it complies with these provisions of the DDA in future.”

Referring to the fact that the DWP is the Government Department responsible for the Disability Discrimination Act, Christopher Cole, Chair of Sheffield Law Centre, said,

“It is astonishing that the government department responsible for introducing the DDA should fail so comprehensively to apply the DDA. Providing access to people with disabilities takes many different forms and this case shows that government departments cannot ignore people’s rights and hinder access to justice.”

Sheffield_Discrimination_Case_15.07.08.pdf