Published on 12, July, 2020
I am 67 and have recently been diagnosed with ADHD, and Level 1 ASD, Aspergers Syndrome.
I also have diagnoses of:
PTSD;
Borderline Personality Disorder;
General Anxiety Disorder;
I am involved in a number of claims for Disability discrimination, and cannot find any solicitors to assist/advise on non employment disability discrimination cases. Can anyone recommend anyone? I approached a firm, who boast about their being austism friendly, and trained, who then never bothered to respond!
I have recently suffered discrimination by a Solicitor, who denied that my behaviour was a direct result of my disability, despite having evidence that it was.
I am struggling and depressed.
Non employment disability discrimination cases are usually decided in small claims where lawyers do not get paid by the other side if they win. The small claims track was intended to be usable without a lawyer after all. This is why lawyers handling non-employment discrimination cases are very rare. Due to new rules I cannot give you anything like advice on how to Bring your own case. I can however tell you that I brought my own case and then made a website explaining the process. Areyoualien.uk
I am grateful for your response. Busy going through the site.
I am exhausted after 5 years of searching.
yes my understanding is causation in section 15 is 'but for' causation. so breaking down section 15(1)(a) the conditions are:
So disability (autism) doesn't have to be the direct cause or only cause of X. It's enough that but for autism X wouldn't have arisen. That's my understanding of 15(1)(a) and i think that's what you are referring to?
However the test in 15(1)(b) can't be ignored. Unless a defendant is really stupid they will generally try in any lawsuit to appeal to section 15(1)(b) as a defence. The bit where it says "It will be discrimination arising from disability if the employer cannot objectively justify the decision to discipline the worker." thats a reference to section 15(1)(b). This guy explains it well (https://www.stammeringlaw.org.uk/disability-equality-law/discrimination/discrimination-arising-from-disability/justification/).
Again I can't tell you how 15(1)(b) might apply in your case. But you certainly need to consider what arguments the defence might use to try and invoke 15(1)(b) as a defence.
The Employment Statutory Code of Practice (EHRC) gives an example of a woman who is disciplined for losing her temper at work, as a result of severe pain caused by cancer, of which her employer was aware. The Code states that the disciplinary action is unfavourable treatment since it is taken because of something which arises in consequence of her disability, namely her loss of temper. There, the disability (cancer) is not the immediate cause of the “something” arising but has the necessary causal connection because it leads the employee to suffer pain, which in turn leads to the loss of temper – the something arising in consequence of the disability.
the bar council has a barrister finder website https://www.directaccessportal.co.uk and NAS has a directory of legal services that are suposed to be autism friendly, but its very out of date. www.autism.org.uk/.../search-results
The solicitor who filed my two previous claims for DD, is an ex barrister. Who then did exactly the same thing.
Trying to find public access barristers who deal with non employment DD is extremely difficult. I have some funds set aside to pay for written advice.
Er. Ok hypothetically it might be considered a form of contract. However equally law only requires companies to make reasonable adjustments. If a company agrees to something unreasonable equally law won’t apply just because they said it was reasonable.
the equality act is concerned with what’s objectively reasonable not what the subjective views of the parties are or were.
that said a signed document like that makes them look stupid at best and dishonest at worst which won’t help a hypothetical defendants case.
H&S, owing to duty of care to staff to protect their mental health.
If an officer of a company agrees to and signs a request for RA, no matter how outlandish, isn't that binding in law?
67justdiagnosed said:Whilst they may cite staff safety, and H&S, they still have to check to see what disadvantage that puts me under.
They do. that is an element of proportionality. But if they attempt to address those issues in ways that wouldn't disadvantaged a hypothetical claimant but it doesn't work because the hypothetical claimant won't cooperate then proportionality is much more likely to be satisfied.
Why would it be a health and safety issue though? It's not as though you were going to hurt staff members? Or threatening to?
67justdiagnosed said:I have some examples, I will post of courts and tribunals accepting the anger as a direct result of a disability.
I don't debate that it can be. And I couldn't know in this case whether it is. I'm just saying the issue of proportionality can't be ignored. Even if causation is undisputed the issue of objective justification and proportionality is likely to be key.
You should probably check they got the dates right too..
Again, where did I state I had sworn at anyone?
My communications with these people is to the point, without frivolities. I classed my comment as fair comment, as only an idiot, manages to get the spelling of the claimants name wrong on court documents, and input the wrong medical practice on the same document, after I had contacted them about 12 times to correct them.
Whilst they may cite staff safety, and H&S, they still have to check to see what disadvantage that puts me under.
I have some examples, I will post of courts and tribunals accepting the anger as a direct result of a disability.
All of this is going to be very dependent on details and really you don’t want to be putting the details of every little iota of your legal/insurance case on the Internet. Even if the rules of this website allowed us to give you advice it appears that this is not a simple discrimination case but one that involves insurance law and possibly the practice of law and conduct of solicitors. You need to speak to a solicitor or a barrister there are some you can instruct directly. That would be my advice.
So to be clear you’re claiming that the insurance company didn’t forward these reports specifically because you accused the insurance company of discrimination.
to me that could be discrimination depending on the circumstances this is not advice this is just an observation. I am uncertain as to whether or not insurers have an obligation to act in your best interest. Your lawyers generally do even if you’re being a jerk to them. But insures it’s a whole other deal I’ve no idea what the law is. I would imagine if the reports were about you you would be entitled to copies under data protection regulations. I don’t know if failing to forward them to a third-party could be considered Any kind of malpractice. You would need to consult an expert.
I have stated to various parties, that at times my partner will assist me, or take over calls. I state that my preferred means of communication is via email. Some of the information received apart from being incorrect, was worded in a manner that could be seen as goading me into a reaction.
A letter with 6 apologies for various acts of Negligence, was sent to me, but they not found to be Negligence by investigator.