JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for DIS-FORUM Archives


DIS-FORUM Archives

DIS-FORUM Archives


DIS-FORUM@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DIS-FORUM Home

DIS-FORUM Home

DIS-FORUM  2005

DIS-FORUM 2005

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: ME/principle

From:

"Cox, Alison" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.

Date:

Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:20:35 -0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (151 lines)

My hope would be that a pragmatic solution like the one I proposed would prevent this matter ever reaching the courts in the first place - thereby saving money, time, energy and stress all round!

I am going to conserve my own time and energy (and that of dis-forum members who read these exchanges) by saying no more on the matter of ensuite facilities today!  

Roll on the weekend!

Alison 

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of A Velarde
Sent: 16 December 2005 13:08
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ME/principle


Alison It would appear that the key point that would really hold up in court
is  your later point: "Given the institution's responsibility to make
reasonable adjustments, I would advocate that the reasonable thing to do in
this instance would be for the accommodation office to provide an ensuite
room for the disabled student but charge as if it were a non-ensuite room",
Andy
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cox, Alison" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: ME/principle


The DSA scheme (flawed as it is) requires each applicant to 'prove their
need'.  It was those authorities (SAAS/LEAs) that I was referring to in my
earlier remark.  I still maintain that the original premise (claiming that a
student has been charged more for an ensuite room because of their
disability) would not hold up.  Humour aside, the first part of my response
is the key:  The issue about tariffs for ensuite and non-ensuite
accommodation in most Halls of Residence is that the variation in charges
applies to all students.

Given the institution's responsibility to make reasonable adjustments, I
would advocate that the reasonable thing to do in this instance would be for
the accommodation office to provide an ensuite room for the disabled student
but charge as if it were a non-ensuite room.

Alison

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of A Velarde
Sent: 16 December 2005 11:32
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ME/principle


it is really funny Alison. I would agree if the law would not have reversed
the burden of proof. it is not the student who has to prove it (*), it is
the institution. So , I am afraid, the flush doesn't work this time! Andy
* Alison's note: "The student would need to convince the authorities that
they would definitely have opted for a non-ensuite room if they hadn't had a
disability".


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cox, Alison" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 11:18 AM
Subject: Re: ME/principle


I can't believe I'm responding to a 'toilet message' after being quiet on
dis-forum for so long.  I must be having a Friday moment!

The issue about tariffs for ensuite and non-ensuite accommodation in most
Halls of Residence is that the variation in charges applies to all students.
So Andy's suggestion about the potential to claim discrimination for a
premium applied to a disabled user in this case would be 'flushed out'
(sorry!) if it came to court.  The student would need to convince the
authorities that they would definitely have opted for a non-ensuite room if
they hadn't had a disability.  That way, it could be said that the
difference in cost between the two was a direct consequence of their
disability.

Season's Greetings!

Alison
----------

Alison Cox
National Co-ordinator/Centre Director, BRITE
c/o Stevenson College
EDINBURGH
EH11 4DE
Tel 0131 535 4756
Fax 0131 535 4880
email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>




-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of A Velarde
Sent: 16 December 2005 11:06
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ME/principle


I gather the cost issue could be picked up by either/both the LEA (via a
specific dsa allocation) or the institution. I guessit will depend on
institutional reality and the extend of the funding. I do not have a fix
idea about it. There is however a principle in play here. Whether an
institution could charge extra for an en-suit bathroom to a student that has
a type of disability that requires such a facility. It is my opinion that
charging that particular student (or the funding authority) may be
discriminatory if we extrapolate insurance case law (insurance companies
were barred to charge a premium to disabled users). Please note that I am
referring to an specific disabled student who requires the facility, not
every disabled student and not every ME suffered too. Just a Friday thought.
Andy
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kathleen Anne Darbyshire" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 10:53 AM
Subject: Re: ME


> The DFES notes for guidance to LEAs on HE Student Finance give the
> specific example of "Additional costs of en suite accommodation" as
> being something that can be met from the DSA  General Allowances.
>
> Kath Darbyshire
> Disability Adviser
>

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential or privileged
information and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom
it is addressed.  If you are not the intended recipient (or responsible for
delivery of the message to such person) please notify the sender
immediately, delete the message from you computer and do not copy, disclose,
distribute or make use of the information.

Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Stevenson College Edinburgh or commit
Stevenson College Edinburgh to any course of action or legal responsibility.

This e-mail and any attachments have been scanned for viruses.  However,
Stevenson College Edinburgh does not accept liability for any harm that may
be caused to the recipients system or data by this e-mail or any
attachments.  Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers act 2000, all
e-mails entering and leaving Stevenson College Edinburgh are subject to
systematic monitoring and may be recorded.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager