Help with your DDA problems

[Anonymous]

Hi I have a company that will help solve your problems with the Disability Discrimination Act. As from 1 October last year it has been unlawful to discriminate against people who have a disability when providing goods or a service. This can be done in many different ways, but the most common is where barriers prevent people getting in to, or around your premises or gaining access to your goods. Our experience shows that this is never malicious or intentional, but the problems are just not understood.

Help is now at hand. We can come to your premises and conduct a full audit for you and provide you with a report that fully explains any problems. This will also givie you a timescale of importance for any needed alterations to be completed. We also have a training section that can train your staff in disability awareness issues.

If you wish to discuss any relevant issues then send me an email with your phone number and we can go from there.

[Ozzy]

Hi Afletch
(by the way, your signup email bounced due to a typo in your email address - I've fixed it for you!)

Glad to see you here, as DDA is a difficult subject to understand. I'm sure you will be of great help here.

[Alpha]

As you say DDA is very rarely intentionally flouted , more often than not it is just a lack of knowledge that these things exist and probably a lack of consideration comes into it

[Anonymous]

Alan you are right but lack of consideration is only due to the ignorance and lack of knowledge that surrounds the subject. The trouble is that this subject is so diverse it can be mind blowing.

People think mainly of wheelchair users when they start to consider access issues. The problem is this is only a very small portion of disabled people in this country although they may be the most visible. You have to also consider people with visual, hearing, learning and mental disabilities. If you run a hotel for example then it can be almost guaranteed hat numerous problems will exist in most of these categories. The way that it works now, is that all businesses are expected to have all of the problems sorted out. It is no good waiting to see if a problem arises, that will be too late and you could end up facing legal action.

[10 Yetis]

Howdy, nice to see you on here.

I heard the other day that websites can fall fowl of the DDA to.

[Anonymous]

Andy, that right they can and they do frequently. It’s no good having a site that has vivid background colours such as yellow background with white text; a person with a visual disability would possibly not be able to read it the same goes for the size and style of text. There are many companies on the net that specialize on this subject and will conduct a full audit of a site. This is an option that you should take if you are not clear about the subject.

[TargetTesting]

afletch,
Welcome to the forum, nice to see that someone else takes accessibility seriously.
I've been on your website and there are some strange things going on. There are two blue bars that are flashing (one at the top and one at the bottom). This seems to stop after while once it has stopped downloading the various images. Even over a broadband link this takes a few mins.

Regards
Bill

[Anonymous]

Hi Bill

Thanks for that. I don't Know if it was an intermitant Problem, but it seems ok now. I had a look this morning, I use Firefox as my main browser also looked in Explorer and had a friend look and all seems OK.

The scroll bars do change colour in Explorer but that is built in so thats OK.

[Pilfo]

We have recently had our website (below) revamped in order to comply with the DDA.

There were quite a number of issues that required sorting out, and we are now AAA Bobby Approved.

Our thanks go to Will Lee of www.webstarcreations.co.uk

Pilfo

[Eagle]

*
Anyone ran Google and Yahoo through the tests recently?....

[bwglaw]

It is a rather complex issue how the DDA applies to websites. Many experts in this field will ask:

1. What are the legal requirements of an accessible website? Bearing in mind that the WAI is not legally-binding, thus not enforceable.

2. How do we apply 'reasonable adjustments' to websites? Every user will have different needs and therefore different adjustments.

3. Is a website part of a service? In the law of contract a website could be seen as a mere advertisement and will not create a binding contract. This also applies to using business cards, compliment slips etc. They are all merely advertisements and will not be construed as legally-binding documents.

4. A website that provides just a page of information - is information a service as opposed to a website with full e-commerce?

5. The DRC Code of Practice may imply that websites must be accessible. Yes, ideally. Legally, impossible to meet under the current wording of the Act. The DRC Code of Practice, remains as it is, a Code of Practice outlining best practice, not what the law says.

The DRC was incorrect to attack/state that all websites must be accessible. The DRC Chair did not think of the legal complications because he is not a lawyer.

Afletch - you run an access consultancy, yes? can you explain perhaps why your website failed to meet the WAI Web Accessibility Guidelines, as a matter of good practice. It does give out the wrong message.


Howdy, nice to see you on here.

I heard the other day that websites can fall fowl of the DDA to.

[TargetTesting]

This is probably going a bit off-topic now; Afletch only wanted to say hi!

Anyway, I'm not a legal expert on DDA and so I'm not qualified to speak on such matters. However, for me there are two good business reasons why websites should be accessible.

1 - There are a large number of people with disabilities (over 8 million) that could be using your services but can't because they can't access your site. I've heard that many people with sight problems find it empowering that they can shop online without the need of a sighted helper.

2 - An accessible website becomes more accessible to a wide range of people using a wide range of browsing devices (not just people who are considered to have a disability).

Obtaining Priority AA is relatively easy for most websites and, so I've been told, is the EU recomended level of compliance. So why not include it as part of your next website review/re-vamp?

Regards
Bill

[Anonymous]

Hi handsonaccess

Of course, you are right, my website is not accessible. I have no excuse for this, but as I am aware of the problem and I shall rectify this as soon as funds are available (this would be deemed reasonable).

This may be part of the Law because if you are providing a service or selling goods via a web site then this has to be accessible. If it is good practice, then good business sense should prevail and the benefit is yours.

Reasonable adjustment is the same as in the physical world and expert advice should be sought. I might add that I am not an expert on accessible websites so I am not spamming the forum. Bill was right, all I was doing was saying hi, but I am glad that people are thinking and talking about this subject.

[bwglaw]

Hi Afletch

The fact that the very same message appears on several other forums does constitute spam. I have no problem with you but some Access Consultancies (AC) in general. I have had to assist a client in legal proceedings because the AC was not qualified or experienced, just a disabled person (which is not a qualification in its own right) and gave incorrect advice. Yes, I am disabled if you wonder.

I am not making an issue of spamming but as a lawyer specialising in disability discrimination I would like to offer a few clarifications, or corrections if you like.

You acknowledge that your website is not accessible but will make it accessible when funds allow and that is considered to be reasonable. From that statement it does appear that you have misinterpreted the law. The resources available to the service provider is a 'factor' - it does not entirely remove the service provider's duty to take reasonable steps to make reasonable adjustments.

Many service providers miss the duty to take reasonable steps . Whilst lack of funds is an issue (which any service provider can say) the Courts would look at what (other) steps have you taken. Basically, this means, what are you going to do about it.

The Court will also look at your present situation. They can see that you have probably spent some money to build your current website. Lets say you spent £500 on it. To make it accessible it would cost an extra £100. This would be reasonable and therefore you will have failed your duty. Our web developer builds all websites to meet WAI and it is second nature to him - does not cost extra either.

Reasonable adjustments is NOT the same in the physical world. I have taken legal action against a Government Dept where they automatically provided a BSL Interpreter for a deaf person. The deaf person did not use sign language but spoken English and requested a Speech-to-Text Reporter. The deaf person succeeded in his claim.

When we consult employers on accessibility in the workplace. We look at what reasonable adjustments are available, such as equipment, changes to policies etc. We do not confirm in any way whether any of those adjustments are in fact reasonable in the particular circumstances. The employer must not assume what adjustments are needed but ask the disabled person. This is why I say reasonable adjustments for everyone is different. The law says what is reasonable in the particular circumstances.

Maybe you need to partnership with someone like us to offer a specialist service i.e. legal, web accessibility etc. If you want us to work with you then please email me at jonathan@handsongroup.co.uk


I shall rectify this as soon as funds are available (this would be deemed reasonable).

Reasonable adjustment is the same as in the physical world and expert advice should be sought.

I might add that I am not an expert on accessible websites so I am not spamming the forum. Bill was right, all I was doing was saying hi, but I am glad that people are thinking and talking about this subject.

[Anonymous]

[quote="handsonaccess"]Hi Afletch


You acknowledge that your website is not accessible but will make it accessible when funds allow and that is considered to be reasonable. From that statement it does appear that you have misinterpreted the law. The resources available to the service provider is a 'factor' - it does not entirely remove the service provider's duty to take reasonable steps to make reasonable adjustments.


As a lawyer specialising in the DDA, you surprise me by making such a sweeping statement. You have not asked if this would be converting the original site or a complete rebuild. To rebuild my site would cost appreciatively more than the sum you mention.

If you wish to test me, as you have indicated on another board I am willing to do this but only in a private environment and I am sure that the owner of the other site that you name would also be willing. I can assume this because I know the guy personally as we worked together through the same course. Involving not only access issues but also learning about other disabilities and their needs.

I agree that a disability does not automatically qualify a person as a consultant, but neither does a qualification. Both sets of people can talk out of their rear end unless they know their subject in great depth. Also as a lawyer I am surprised that you disregarded the language that was used.
There is no way that any premises can be made 100% accessible for 100% of the population. If an employer has a disabled person working for them or they are about to employ someone who has a disability, regardless of what that may be. The first step is to liaise with the person to determine what is needed. This could be very specific! The DDA requires people to anticipate what is needed. This is generalised with guidelines that are already in existence. If these are adhered to, then this would possibly be deemed reasonable. If an audit has taken place and timescales have been applied to any rectifications, then this could also possibly be deemed reasonable. Exactly what is reasonable is an unknown quantity at the moment which is why things are up in the air at the moment. Being aware of a problem and working towards rectifying this is completely different to ignoring the situation.

Adrian :)

[bwglaw]

As a lawyer specialising in the DDA, you surprise me by making such a sweeping statement. You have not asked if this would be converting the original site or a complete rebuild. To rebuild my site would cost appreciatively more than the sum you mention.


A lawyer would not be the best person to assess whether it is a complete rebuild or a modification of your existing site. I have spoken to our web developer and he says your site can be modified for a relatively small fee.

If you wish to test me, as you have indicated on another board I am willing to do this but only in a private environment and I am sure that the owner of the other site that you name would also be willing. I can assume this because I know the guy personally as we worked together through the same course. Involving not only access issues but also learning about other disabilities and their needs.

Not sure which board you are referring to. I am not out to test people but I am entitled to contribute as I see fit especially when I am best qualified to comment. Having a disability too, is a bonus.

Also as a lawyer I am surprised that you disregarded the language that was used.

You are not making clear references to what you are referring to exactly.

There is no way that any premises can be made 100% accessible for 100% of the population.

I agree...which is why we have reasonableness test

If an employer has a disabled person working for them or they are about to employ someone who has a disability, regardless of what that may be. The first step is to liaise with the person to determine what is needed.

I agree, but you said in a previous post that reasonable adjustments are the same as in the physical world - or something along those lines.

The DDA requires people to anticipate what is needed. This is generalised with guidelines that are already in existence. If these are adhered to, then this would possibly be deemed reasonable. If an audit has taken place and timescales have been applied to any rectifications, then this could also possibly be deemed reasonable.

It does sound like you are referring to the physical features of the workplace. The DRC CoP is purely guidance. If a disabled employee meets any of the reasonable adjustments suggested by the DRC CoP then yes it would be reasonable. I was making the point of reasonable adjustments that might not be in the DRC CoP and that the employer should not be reliant on any audits made but as you have just said, to consult the employee in question.

Finally, my postings should not be misconstrued. I am just having a healthy debate. I do not wish for some people to be misinformed in what the law says. I am often contacted by solicitors for advice on their duties under the DDA and I am happy to share my expertise.

Feel free to email me. I do not have your email address.