Services: examples on stammering

The 'Revised Code'
means the 2006 (Revised) Code of Practice - Rights of Access: services to the public, public authority functions, private clubs and premises (pdf file on EHRC website). The 2002 Code of Practice which applied before 4th December 2006 is available on the archived DRC website.

Right to be heard
Being offhand or rude
Writing what you want to say?
Automated telephone systems
Voice analysis on insurance claims
Cost of taking longer
More examples

This page gives examples of what is likely to breach the DDA rules on services. It focuses on services to the public, but much of it should apply also to other Part 3 rules such as public authority functions.

WARNING: This page may need to be updated. The House of Lords decision in London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm (June 2008) is likely to make it more difficult to argue discrimination for a reason related to the disability. Claimants will often seek to argue their case as a breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments. More on the House of Lords decision...

Right to be heard

In general, a service provider needs to wait and give you time to speak, if they would listen to someone speaking fluently. This applies whether they are a shop assistant, a person speaking to you on the phone, or anyone else providing a service.

From the Code of Practice:

"It is important that service providers do not assume that the only way to make services accessible to disabled people is to make a physical alteration to their premises (such as installing a ramp or widening a doorway). Often, minor measures such as allowing more time to serve a disabled customer, will help disabled people to use a service."
Para. 6.10

"The operator of a booking office of a small heritage railway decides to communicate with passengers who have speech or hearing impairments by exchanging written notes. This is likely to be a reasonable step for this service provider to have to take.

"However, it is unlikely to be a sufficient reasonable adjustment for the operator of a ticket office at a mainline rail terminus to make for such passengers. Instead, it installs an induction loop system and a textphone. These are likely to be reasonable steps for a large station to have to take."
Para. 7.21

"Disabled customers with a speech impairment or a learning disability may have difficulty in explaining to a bank cashier what their service requirements are. If the cashier asks the disabled customers to go to the back of the queue so as not to delay other customers waiting to be served, this is unlikely to be justified."
Para. 10.44

(Revised) Code of Practice - Rights of Access, 2006

A provider cannot refuse to hear you merely because other people would be inconvenienced or delayed. See the example from paragraph 10.44 of Revised Code (in box). The provider could refuse if exceptionally he can rely on one of the grounds of justification, principally health and safety or where it is necessary to provide the service at all. However, it seems that generally a service provider needs to wait while a person who stammers gets his words out, if the provider would hear out a fluent person saying the same thing - or at least give him time to write if he cannot say it (see below on writing).

The main problem I have come across is people putting the phone down on my partner, for example when she phones up to check that a shop has something in stock, or to book a restaurant. This is likely to contavene the DDA as a refusal to provide service, or perhaps providing a worse standard or manner of service to a person who stammers. Compensation for injury to feelings would probably be available if one wanted to seek it. (My Telephone page brings together DDA issues to do with the phone.)

There is also a case resolved by the Disability Conciliation Service, where a person with a severe speech impairment was refused service, said to be drunk, and subjected to insulting remarks by a member of the bar staff.

Paragraph 6.10 of the Revised Code (see box) reminds providers that often minor measures such as allowing more time to serve a disabled customer will help disabled people to use a service.

Being offhand or rude

Being offhand or rude to stammering customers may well constitute a worse standard of service (para 10.22 of Revised Code). Of course, if the provider is offhand or rude like that to everyone there is no DDA breach!

Laughing at a person who stammers is likely to be a breach as being a worse standard of service. This happens with distressing frequency, particularly on the telephone.

Example: a person who stammers rang a public helpline. The lady at the other end laughed at her as she was trying to speak. When the caller said that wasn't acceptable, the lady replied: "You see, you can talk perfectly well when you want to!" The caller wrote to the helpline who responded excellently. They listened to their tape of the conversation and the lady was taken off the helpline for re-training. They also contacted the British Stammering Association for information to help them build stammering into their general training courses for helpline staff.

Writing what you want to say?

Paragraph 7.21 of the Revised Code (see example in box) talks about the possibility of using written notes to communicate in the case of people with speech impairments, as an 'auxiliary aid or service'. However, many people with a stammer would prefer to talk rather than write, perhaps so as not to be singled out as 'different'.

It is not clear how far, if at all, a provider could (politely) insist that a person who is stammering writes down what he wants to say rather than says it. If a provider tries to insist on this, is it a worse 'standard' or 'manner' of service?. In practice it may sometimes be helpful for all concerned that things are written down. In any event, a suggestion that you write down what you want to say should be polite.

Example: a person who stammers was giving her personal details to a health service receptionist. She got her name out with some trouble while the receptionist waited. The receptionist then handed her a piece of paper and pen and asked her to write down her address and telephone number. The receptionist did this as if she might have asked any fluent person to write down their details in the same way. Given the way it was done, this was perfectly acceptable to the person who stammered.

Automated telephone systems

There are now phone systems which understand speech. However, voice recognition software is unlikely to understand someone who is stammering significantly. The software may also time out if there is a significant pause while the person tries to say the word. It may well be a reasonable adjustment to allow the caller to be transferred promptly to a real person, if the computerised system cannot cope with their speech.

More under 'Guidelines for service providers'...

Voice analysis on insurance and benefit claims

I understand it is now common for insurance companies to use voice analysis software on people phoning up to make claims, to flag up those that are likely to be dishonest, eg where speech is hesitant. Claims flagged up by the software can then be subject to particularly rigorous investigation. This raises DDA issues because of the danger of people who stammer being unfairly targeted. Similar technology is now starting to be used for benefit claims.

More under 'Guidelines for service providers'...

Cost of taking longer

In the case of 'services to the public', the cost of providing a bespoke service, but not the cost of making reasonable adjustments, can be passed on to the disabled person.

Providing a service to someone who stammers may take longer. Only in some cases - eg a solicitor charging for his time, or a phone company charging for phone calls - will the provider commonly charge extra for this.

A service provider may choose not to charge extra. But is he allowed to charge extra if he wishes? This is a difficult area - see Services to the public: cost of taking longer.

More examples

For more examples, see 'Guidelines for service providers'

Top