Disability Discrimination Act 2005

poet123

TFD wrote: »

Sounds fishy, you only have to read the forums here to see how hard it is to get a credit card with no history or job!

It's not unheard of for people to be offered cards, but then declined when they apply. So this is possible.

Also banks will often offer credit facilities based on how a current account has been run. They like to see regular, consistent income, but from the comments the OP has made, this doesn't sound like the case with her son.

The card actually arrived and was promptly cut up. He had declined the offer at the meeting to change his student account into a grad account, and yet a couple of weeks later it dropped onto the mat. The advisor must have somehow linked it into the application to change accounts. He has run hIs student account in an exemplary fashion though, not even using the £3,000 O/D facility during his period at Uni, so maybe they based the offer on that.

poet123

TFD wrote: »

But then the OP wouldn't be able to moan on about how all the banks are discriminating blaah blaah. She's not looking for advise - many of us have come up with some good ideas - but to rant on about discrimination that is not happening.

In your opinion, or in your legally qualified opinion?:D

poet123

CLAPTON wrote: »

the practical problem is simply solved by just moving a few grand into his bank a/c; practical problem completely solved without having to borrow

the other issue seems more to do with trust law (that I don't understand) than anything to do with discrimination about his disability

I think it is to do with the principle, as much as the actuality of needing a card.

poet123

Fang wrote: »

You're not making sense. Before you said that the credit card would be used to spread the cost of more expensive items, but now you're saying that the cost will be met in full by the trust at the end of the month.

It's highly offensive for you to suggest that the majority of unemployed people are so by choice, this is not the case, any more than it is the case that your son is disabled by choice.

The fact is that your son does not meet the requirements for a credit card and as credit is not a right, he should simply save the money up, or have money transferred out of the trust to pay for the more expensive larger items.

There is a clear reason why your son is being denied a credit card and as they don't know about his disability, it cannot be that. Your son should not be given any advantage over that of someone else in the same situation and all your bleating is not getting you anywhere other than up people's noses.

Could you clear up why you say that your son will never work, but then say that he is hoping to? Could you also clear up why he, as a 27 year old, is not doing this himself?

The OP has now stated that the CC companies did know of the disability.

TFD_2

poet123 wrote: »

In your opinion, or in your legally qualified opinion?:D

It depends what you mean by legally qualified, I have some legal training, and also a reasonable understanding of the DDA. These are a factor in my comments, but I've also used a certain amount of common sense.

poet123 wrote: »

The card actually arrived and was promptly cut up. He had declined the offer at the meeting to change his student account into a grad account, and yet a couple of weeks later it dropped onto the mat. The advisor must have somehow linked it into the application to change accounts. He has run hIs student account in an exemplary fashion though, not even using the £3,000 O/D facility during his period at Uni, so maybe they based the offer on that.

You said he had no credit history. Now you say he had a £3K overdraft. Any other facts you're missing out?

Fang_3

poet123 wrote: »

The OP has now stated that the CC companies did know of the disability.

The OP has said a lot of things. Most don't add up.

poet123

TFD wrote: »

It depends what you mean by legally qualified, I have some legal training, and also a reasonable understanding of the DDA. These are a factor in my comments, but I've also used a certain amount of common sense.



You said he had no credit history. Now you say he had a £3K overdraft. Any other facts you're missing out?

So, with your legal trianing and knowledge of the DDA are you adamant that the OP has no case, and is therefore wasting her time seeking legal opinion?

The 3k overdraft was part of the tiered student account, everyone who is a student who banks with Lloyds gets that amount. Aside from that he has absolutely nothing in his name that would give him a credit score. I would have thought that on the face of it, he and the OP's son would have similar score, or my sons would be lower.

TFD_2

poet123 wrote: »

So, with your legal trianing and knowledge of the DDA are you adamant that the OP has no case, and is therefore wasting her time seeking legal opinion?

The 3k overdraft was part of the tiered student account, everyone who is a student who banks with Lloyds gets that amount. Aside from that he has absolutely nothing in his name that would give him a credit score. I would have thought that on the face of it, he and the OP's son would have similar score, or my sons would be lower.

Not at all, I have merely given an opinion.

Fang_3

poet123 wrote: »

So, with your legal trianing and knowledge of the DDA are you adamant that the OP has no case, and is therefore wasting her time seeking legal opinion?

The 3k overdraft was part of the tiered student account, everyone who is a student who banks with Lloyds gets that amount. Aside from that he has absolutely nothing in his name that would give him a credit score. I would have thought that on the face of it, he and the OP's son would have similar score, or my sons would be lower.

That's nonsense. The OP's son is not a graduate, your son is; the OP's son has never had credit before, your son has; the OP's son is unemployed, and your son presumably is. So clearly your son's credit score would not be lower.

zppp

Fang wrote: »

The OP has said a lot of things. Most don't add up.

Agreed. What the OP would have to prove even if they were aware of this, is that they acted on the information re the disability, which one would have to prove, in order to fall under the DDA.

Fighting a losing battle springs to mind.