Dyslexic man sues bank
- 30 Apr 07, 1:37 PM
I often think I'd like to start a new series of posts on this weblog, called Suewatch, detailing all those fascinating - and some of them really are fascinating - cases in which disabled people sue businesses, organisations and employers for so many varied reasons.
Like this latest one, for instance: Robert Neil, a dyslexic man from East Anglia, is because he says he has racked up thousands of pounds worth of bank charges, got himself a bad credit rating and suffered stress because he cannot understand his bank statements. He claims that both Barclays and the Royal Bank of Scotland are in breach of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 because they did not take into account his difficulties in comprehending written words and figures, nor did they offer him alternative ways in which to access this information. The case is believed to be the first of its kind in the UK.
Mr Neil's suggestion for how banks should serve customers with dyslexia is as follows: "What we need is for people like me to be able to go into banks, say you've got dyslexia, and be taken into a separate room where they can verbally explain to you about loans and bank statements. What you get now is 'read this' and you're handed a leaflet even though they know you're dyslexic and you cannot read". Meanwhile, in response to the case, the Royal Bank of Scotland has pointed out that it offers statements in alternative formats such as audio tapes, large print or Braille, while Barclays has defended itself by saying that it has a dedicated Disability Issues Unit which oversees procedures in all such matters.
But what do you reckon? Has Mr Neil got a case?
Comments
There are many different forms of disability affecting many of us that would really benefit from banks explaining all about loans etc. However these then are supported by the audio tapes etc offered by the branches anyway. He should have actively sought help in understanding etc, however dyscalculia makes things extremely difficult for him. It works both ways in keeping on top of banking. However if he was checking his bank balance every day, maybe he should have checked it more often than that? It seems he's tried to do what he can but ultimately it's usually down to the customer to look after money themselves but the banks should have kept an eye on things too if they knew he had that.
Surely if the bank was aware of the man's disability then it should have provided reasonable alternatives to enable its customer to make use of their services. It's not about how many times a day he should've checked his bank balance.
While I may not necessarily agree that the solution should have been for a teller to take him into a separate room to explain every bank statement, there are a myriad of other measures which the bank could have implemented to assist the man -- a text message to alert him when his account balance dipped below a certain amount, for example, or otherwise consulted with Mr Neil to come up with the best way to manage his finances in view of his difficulties.
I must add, of course, that this doesn't even take into account the legality of charging excessive bank fees in the first place ... Don't get me started.