 |
 |
I won my case. Legal Services Ombudsman for England and Wales sets precedent for communicating with people with Autistic Spectrum Disorders and SpLd's.... See my case below:- I Mr Colin Revell, give individuals or groups the right to breach confidentiality share this case with others and groups in the public interest to protect against disability discrimination and breaches of human and civil rights for all disabled people with Autistic Spectrum Disorders(Aspergers Syndrome) and Specific Learning Difficulties(SpLd's) in England and Wales Legal Services Ombudsman case ref: 27185 September 2003 Further to our previous correspondence, I am writing to let you know that we have now received from the General Council of the Bar (the Bar Council) copies of all the e-mails which they sent to, and received from, you in connection with your complaint about Dr Armstrong. The Bar Council did not keep notes of any telephone conversations with you. I have considered what you say about the way that they dealt with your complaint about Dr Armstrong, and I am writing now to let you know my conclusions. As you know, my primary role is to investigate the way in which the professional bodies handle complaints about lawyers. Your complaint is an unusual one, in that the Bar Council never actually dealt your complaint about Dr Armstrong. However, the Bar Council's refusal to deal with your complaint is something which I can consider. If I am not satisfied with the Bar Council's decision not to investigate, I can either formally criticise them, or I can recommend that they reconsider the matter. It might assist if I begin by setting out the facts. You wanted to complain about Dr Armstrong. You telephoned the Bar Council at the beginning of November 2002. They told you that you would have to fill in their application form. You told them that you have difficulty in managing paper communications. This is because you have various autistic spectrum disorders, including Asperger's Syndrome. Initially, it appeared that the Cherry Tree Advice Centre might be able to help you complete the application form, however the Centre advised the Bar Council that they were too busy to assist. Mr Woolf, the Assistant Executive Secretary to the Bar Council's Professional Conduct and Complaints Committee (PCC), in his letter to you dated 18 December 2002, then set out what he considered the options to be, namely: that your complaint be dealt with entirely by e-mail; that you find someone to assist you by writing letters on your behalf, and reading letters to you; that you provide all information on audio cassettes, which they would be prepared to supply. You replied that you would like to correspond by e-mail. You attempted to fill in the Bar Council's application form online, but had difficulty in doing so because it is in acrobat reader format. You suggested instead that perhaps you could discuss your complaint over the telephone, and someone from the Bar Council could complete the form on your behalf. The Bar Council told you that completing an application form over the telephone was '. not an option' [their emphasis], since doing so would be '. simply too time consuming . for our small staff team to be able to consider. We are also not always able to telephone you at times that are suitable for you.' They suggested instead that you either typed the answers to the questions on their application form in an e-mail, or that you provided information on cassettes, which they would send to you. Your told them that you would like to supply the information on an audio tape. They responded by sending you, via e-mail, a Microsoft Word version of their application form, and asked you to complete it. You told them that you found the form 'distressing'. You explained that you find typing on keyboards 'very difficult' and 'laborious'. You repeated that you would like the Bar Council to either complete the form for you over the telephone, or send you an audio tape. You told them that you were now feeling 'frustrated' and 'angry' at their long delay in taking your complaint (three months had passed by this stage). Mr Turner, the Executive Secretary to the PCC sent you a lengthy e-mail in response. He told you that, given the size of their complaints department, and their resources, they did not consider it practical for you to dictate your answers over the telephone, or for you to supply the information using audio tapes. He said that they did not have anyone in the department who could speed write or take shorthand. He suggested that you supply the answers via e-mail, taking several days if necessary. He pointed out that you had been able to communicate with them so far via e-mail. Mr Turner acknowledged that they were aware of their obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act to take 'reasonable steps' to accommodate the requirements of people with disabilities. In your case, he concluded that the Bar Council considered it reasonable for them to adjust their procedures, so that you could complete their form by e-mail. There was some further contact between you and the Bar Council, in which you made it clear that you considered their position on the matter to be unacceptable. I think it is fair to say that relations between you broke down. They decided not to accept any further telephone calls from you. You complained to my Office about the Bar Council's refusal to assist you in completing their application form. This Office also requires complainants to complete an application form. You spoke to a member of my staff on the telephone, who took your details, completed the application form on your behalf, and sent it to you via e-mail to amend/agree. You made some minor amendments to the form, then e-mailed it back to my Office. It is therefore difficult for me to accept that the Bar Council could not do the same thing. I should also point out that the member of staff from this Office who took your details does not speed write, and does not know any shorthand. In my view, it is simply not good enough for the Bar Council to say that they do not have the staff or resources to speak to complainants over the telephone. This implies that a sizeable proportion of the public might not have access to the barrristers' complaint-handling system. I am thinking not only of people with disabilities. I am also thinking of people who find it difficult, for whatever reason, to express themselves clearly in writing, including those whose first language is not English. It seems to me that, if the Bar Council really do not have the resources to communicate with people over the telephone, then they need to do something about it as a matter of urgency. Given that the subject of complaints are likely, by virtue of their professional training and experience, to be extremely articulate and persuasive in writing, it seems to me that, if there is to be any sense of balance in the complaint-handling process, the Bar Council needs to seriously consider what steps it can take to assist complainants who have difficulty with the written word. In conclusion, I am not satisfied that the Bar Council's decision not to assist you with completion of their application form was reasonable. They appeared to decide that, because you were able to send them e-mails, you could happily complete their application form by e-mail. However, you explained to my Office that you cannot contemplate blank forms without panicking. I therefore recommend, in accordance with Section 23(2)(a) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 that the Bar Council reconsider the matter. When they do, I trust that they will either help you complete the form, or send you audio tapes so that you can dictate the information required. If resources are a problem, then it seems to me that the former option would be the most appropriate, from the Bar Council's point of view. However, that is a matter for the Bar Council to determine. In considering this complaint, I have been struck by the distress and inconvenience you have experienced. You first contacted the Bar Council eight months ago, and yet you are no further forward in terms of having your complaint about Dr Armstrong considered. You have had to cope with a measure of insensitivity (albeit unintentional) on the part of the Bar Council. You have had the inconvenience of having to complain to my Office in order to progress your complaint. For these reasons, I recommend, in accordance with Section 23(2)(d) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, that the Bar Council award you £200 compensation. I am required by Section 23(1) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 to report my conclusions to the parties involved. I am therefore sending a copy of this letter Dr Armstrong of Tooks and to the Bar Council. Section 23 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 also requires the Bar Council to inform the Ombudsman within three months from the date of this letter of the actions they have taken or propose to take to comply with my recommendation. Please let me know if you do not hear directly from the Bar Council within that time. Yours sincerely Zahida Manzoor CBE Legal Services Ombudsman for England and Wales ________________End of message______________________ Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List are now located at: www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.