Warning - New Clydesdale Bank MasterCard Debit Cards

savagej

The "reasonable adjustment" in this case (and many others depending on the circumstrances) would be allowing accounts to be opened by post. Unless they want to send around a bank employee to your house to open the account?? Or they could offer on-line applications and electronic ID verfication or allow you to send in your proof of ID as do other banks.

Their excuse over the phone for not allowing postal applications is money laundering rules, which clearly is not true.

Edit: I am sure now that it has been made so public their rep will be back with a response as to how they will be making resonable adjustments for their customers with mental health problems, not just the wide doors in branches for wheelchair users as that is one of their standard replies they dont seem to recognise mental health issues.

benoit

Wonder if they will produce the relevant part of the money laundering rules that prevent them from sending an application form in the post?

Yorkshire_Bank_company_representative

I won't pretend to have all the answers to hand on the DDA regulations and what needs to be done so I'll look in to it and report back.

BS7 - on Paypal & Amazon, yes they were rather specific changes they made that you really wouldn't have tested for and, as I said, it didn't just affect us or Debit Mastercard, but other banks using Visa Debit.

benoit

Yorkshire_Bank_company_representative wrote: »

I won't pretend to have all the answers to hand on the DDA regulations and what needs to be done so I'll look in to it and report back.
.

Thanks, i would be grateful. My nearest branch would mean taking around 2 or 3 different trains into the city centre then back out on another line. Certainly not worth the aggro & expense it would involve just for a 'tin-pot' basic account. I'm about to undergo my 3rd major back operation in the last 18 months so if i could fill an application in by post i wouldn't think twice about it.

benoit

Any update on this at all please?

Yorkshire_Bank_company_representative

Hi Benoit
apologies for the delay. I've looked in to this and I'm no lawyer so I don't want to get in to the nitty gritty on whys and wherefores, but it's not as black and white as might be suggested.

However, clearly not having a remote channel for applications isn't as good as it could be, and while it's not going to help you in the immediate future, the work to change this has already kicked off, I'm told.

savagej

Hi YB Rep.

Can you please explains the banks procedure to help someone with a mental health problem (as definied as a disability under the DDA1995), who cannot enter a branch to fill in a form or provide identification, open an account. That is what "reasonable adjustments will the bank be making to comply with current law in this scenario".

Thanks.

James

edit: in order that you comply with the act itself and the spirit of the law to allow access to the same goods and services as a non-disabled and disabled person has who can go into a branch.

Yorkshire_Bank_company_representative

As my response above says, we're in the process of making changes to add a remote application process.

savagej

Hi YB Rep

The law passed in 1995 sometime ago, your answer is not sufficient given the size of your organisation. You should have implimented and tested your changes in 1994, not only now that someone on a moneysaving forum is showing up a very large company.

You are required to comply with the law, can I ask again what in the National Australia Group's offical company policy for dealing with making "reasonable adjustments" were people cannot access branches to open an account due to a disability as definied within the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, wether that be to complete an application form or provide ID.

If you fail to answer the question I am sure there will be no failure on the part of many major charities involved in the field of disability, mental health and equal access in this country who would be happy to take this matter up with the bank and in the appropriate courts, if necessary.

I would challenge you to find another bank of your standing in the UK who is in breaching the DDA to such a level, were it comes to those with mental health problems or for any reason those that cannot go to a branch due to a disability as definied in the Act.

I would therefore request you reconsider your above answer in light of the position the Group finds itself in and has been in for 15 year, may I remind you ignorance of the law is no defence if a case is brough against you.

Therefore, please provide a the contact details of the dept. or person involved who will be opening accounts for those with disabilites that cannot access branches, as per the above.

Regards


James

Edit:

Here is a copy of the Act on which you are failing to comply and are therefore subject to sactions mainly in the form of fines.

Discrimination in relation to goods, facilities and services
(1) It is unlawful for a provider of services to discriminate against a disabled person—
(a) in refusing to provide, or deliberately not providing, to the disabled person any service which he provides, or is prepared to provide, to members of the public;
(b) in failing to comply with any duty imposed on him by section 21 in circumstances in which the effect of that failure is to make it impossible or unreasonably difficult for the disabled person to make use of any such service;
(c) in the standard of service which he provides to the disabled person or the manner in which he provides it to him; or
(d) in the terms on which he provides a service to the disabled person.
(2) For the purposes of this section and sections 20 and 21—
(a) the provision of services includes the provision of any goods or facilities;
(b) a person is “a provider of services” if he is concerned with the provision, in the United Kingdom, of services to the public or to a section of the public; and
(c) it is irrelevant whether a service is provided on payment or without payment.
(3) The following are examples of services to which this section and sections 20 and 21 apply—
(a) access to and use of any place which members of the public are permitted to enter;
(b) access to and use of means of communication;
(c) access to and use of information services;
(d) accommodation in a hotel, boarding house or other similar establishment;
(e) facilities by way of banking or insurance or for grants, loans, credit or finance;
(f) facilities for entertainment, recreation or refreshment;
(g) facilities provided by employment agencies or under section 2 of the [1973 c. 50.] Employment and Training Act 1973;
(h) the services of any profession or trade, or any local or other public authority.

20 Meaning of “discrimination”
(1) For the purposes of section 19, a provider of services discriminates against a disabled person if—
(a) for a reason which relates to the disabled person’s disability, he treats him less favourably than he treats or would treat others to whom that reason does not or would not apply; and
(b) he cannot show that the treatment in question is justified.
(2) For the purposes of section 19, a provider of services also discriminates against a disabled person if—
(a) he fails to comply with a section 21 duty imposed on him in relation to the disabled person; and
(b) he cannot show that his failure to comply with that duty is justified.
(3) For the purposes of this section, treatment is justified only if—
(a) in the opinion of the provider of services, one or more of the conditions mentioned in subsection (4) are satisfied; and
(b) it is reasonable, in all the circumstances of the case, for him to hold that opinion.
(4) The conditions are that—
(a) in any case, the treatment is necessary in order not to endanger the health or safety of any person (which may include that of the disabled person);
(b) in any case, the disabled person is incapable of entering into an enforceable agreement, or of giving an informed consent, and for that reason the treatment is reasonable in that case;
(c) in a case falling within section 19(1)(a), the treatment is necessary because the provider of services would otherwise be unable to provide the service to members of the public;
(d) in a case falling within section 19(1)(c) or (d), the treatment is necessary in order for the provider of services to be able to provide the service to the disabled person or to other members of the public;
(e) in a case falling within section 19(1)(d), the difference in the terms on which the service is provided to the disabled person and those on which it is provided to other members of the public reflects the greater cost to the provider of services in providing the service to the disabled person.
(5) Any increase in the cost of providing a service to a disabled person which results from compliance by a provider of services with a section 21 duty shall be disregarded for the purposes of subsection (4)(e).
(6) Regulations may make provision, for purposes of this section, as to circumstances in which—
(a) it is reasonable for a provider of services to hold the opinion mentioned in subsection (3)(a);
(b) it is not reasonable for a provider of services to hold that opinion.
(7) Regulations may make provision for subsection (4)(b) not to apply in prescribed circumstances where—
(a) a person is acting for a disabled person under a power of attorney;
(b) functions conferred by or under Part VII of the [1983 c. 20.] Mental Health Act 1983 are exercisable in relation to a disabled person’s property or affairs; or
(c) powers are exercisable in Scotland in relation to a disabled person’s property or affairs in consequence of the appointment of a curator bonis, tutor or judicial factor.
(8) Regulations may make provision, for purposes of this section, as to circumstances (other than those mentioned in subsection (4)) in which treatment is to be taken to be justified.
(9) In subsections (3), (4) and (8) “treatment” includes failure to comply with a section 21 duty.
21 Duty of providers of services to make adjustments

(1) Where a provider of services has a practice, policy or procedure which makes it impossible or unreasonably difficult for disabled persons to make use of a service which he provides, or is prepared to provide, to other members of the public, it is his duty to take such steps as it is reasonable, in all the circumstances of the case, for him to have to take in order to change that practice, policy or procedure so that it no longer has that effect.
(2) Where a physical feature (for example, one arising from the design or construction of a building or the approach or access to premises) makes it impossible or unreasonably difficult for disabled persons to make use of such a service, it is the duty of the provider of that service to take such steps as it is reasonable, in all the circumstances of the case, for him to have to take in order to—
(a) remove the feature;
(b) alter it so that it no longer has that effect;
(c) provide a reasonable means of avoiding the feature; or
(d) provide a reasonable alternative method of making the service in question available to disabled persons.
(3) Regulations may prescribe—
(a) matters which are to be taken into account in determining whether any provision of a kind mentioned in subsection (2)(c) or (d) is reasonable; and
(b) categories of providers of services to whom subsection (2) does not apply.
(4) Where an auxiliary aid or service (for example, the provision of information on audio tape or of a sign language interpreter) would—
(a) enable disabled persons to make use of a service which a provider of services provides, or is prepared to provide, to members of the public, or
(b) facilitate the use by disabled persons of such a service,
it is the duty of the provider of that service to take such steps as it is reasonable, in all the circumstances of the case, for him to have to take in order to provide that auxiliary aid or service.
(5) Regulations may make provision, for the purposes of this section—
(a) as to circumstances in which it is reasonable for a provider of services to have to take steps of a prescribed description;
(b) as to circumstances in which it is not reasonable for a provider of services to have to take steps of a prescribed description;
(c) as to what is to be included within the meaning of “practice, policy or procedure”;
(d) as to what is not to be included within the meaning of that expression;
(e) as to things which are to be treated as physical features;
(f) as to things which are not to be treated as such features;
(g) as to things which are to be treated as auxiliary aids or services;
(h) as to things which are not to be treated as auxiliary aids or services.
(6) Nothing in this section requires a provider of services to take any steps which would fundamentally alter the nature of the service in question or the nature of his trade, profession or business.
(7) Nothing in this section requires a provider of services to take any steps which would cause him to incur expenditure exceeding the prescribed maximum.
(8) Regulations under subsection (7) may provide for the prescribed maximum to be calculated by reference to—
(a) aggregate amounts of expenditure incurred in relation to different cases;
(b) prescribed periods;
(c) services of a prescribed description;
(d) premises of a prescribed description; or
(e) such other criteria as may be prescribed.
(9) Regulations may provide, for the purposes of subsection (7), for expenditure incurred by one provider of services to be treated as incurred by another.
(10) This section imposes duties only for the purpose of determining whether a provider of services has discriminated against a disabled person; and accordingly a breach of any such duty is not actionable as such.

benoit

Yorkshire_Bank_company_representative wrote: »

Hi Benoit
apologies for the delay. I've looked in to this and I'm no lawyer so I don't want to get in to the nitty gritty on whys and wherefores, but it's not as black and white as might be suggested.

However, clearly not having a remote channel for applications isn't as good as it could be, and while it's not going to help you in the immediate future, the work to change this has already kicked off, I'm told.

What's not as black and white as might be suggested about sticking an application form in an envelope? Seems a bit ambiguous really & does not really provide a clear explanation.

So are you saying that the Bank will be providing application forms through the post in future? If so when will the customer at the end of the process see the changes? I still feel that a large section of the the public are effectively being excluded from the Bank if no exceptions are currently being made to the (not-so-water-tight) 'Rule'.

Out of interest what would happen if i wrote and asked for an application to be posted to me? May be worth doing just so the reply can be forwarded elsewhere to check the legality of refusing to make exceptions or reasonable adjustments for disabled citizens.

This is the 21st Century after all.