In a typical week we receive about 20 enquiries.  In the last 48 hours we have received over 400 - the vast majority about disability discrimination related to face coverings.  Despite a relatively clear Government exemptions policy, most members of the public appear to believe that everyone must be masked.  Some, put in a state of fear by the coronavirus scare, are resorting to harassment and discrimination.

We are not lawyers, and we do not believe that any face-covering discrimination case has been to court.  We have acted in one case and that was settled out of court for £7,000.  This was because the Claimant obviously could not wear a mask and she was prevented from accessing an essential service.  The company concerned had no choice but to do what it could to put matters right as it had so obviously messed up. Some businesses who are prepared to admit fault and own up will settle, but others may dig-in.

In that situation, The Equality Act (or Disability Discrimination Act in Northern Ireland), which is believed to be the reason for the exemptions policy, can only be enforced by victims of discrimination taking cases to court.  And, ultimately, only a court can decide if there has been discrimination and / or harassment in any particular case. 

Legal aid is virtually non-existent and so lawyers are largely the preserve of the wealthy.  Disabled people are not generally very rich.  The idea of the county court small claims track is that claimants can use it themselves without lawyers.  Using it is the only realistic way of making most Equality Act rights anything more than theoretical in England, with variations of this available in Scotland and Northern Ireland. 

That doesn't mean it's easy though, but there is only really any point in using our template letter (posted in our last news item and based on the Equality Act 2010) if you are prepared to take that step afterwards if necessary.  We cannot litigate as we are not solicitors, but sometimes support disabled litigants in person.  Given the volume of enquiries at the moment it is unfortunately unlikely we will be able to directly help everyone.  We are therefore hoping people can use the publicly available information that we use to pursue cases with confidence in their right to take action to protect basic civil rights. 

At present it feels like disability discrimination is where race discrimination was in about 1950 and that can only be tackled by enforcing rights as described.  We are recruiting staff so we can do more also.

We are inundated by an avalanche of enquiries from people discriminated against for being unable to wear face coverings.  Please bear with us while we work through the back-log. 

Many of the incidents are harrowing and frightening and suggest deeply disablist attitudes are rife in society.  The current situation has sinister historical parallels.  Many people appear to believe that putting on a face covering makes them superior whereas those unable to wear one are inferior to them.

The following may help.

The reason for the Government's face coverings exemption policy is to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination legislation.  The Government is clear that "the rules" do not require everyone to wear face coverings: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/disabled-people-exempt-from-wearing-face-coverings-under-new-government-guidance .

Here is a template letter you may find helpful.  It is only suitable for England and Wales but could be adapted.  Please note the Equality Act 2010 does not apply in Northern Ireland but there is the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 instead. 

Please also note there are no county courts in Scotland but there are sheriff courts instead.

More information can be obtained from:

https://www.equalityni.org/Individuals/I-have-a-problem-with-a-service/Disability/Complaints-process

Please bear in mind there is usually a six month time limit to make a discrimination claim.

There is a chance you may be insured with legal cover - for example your household policy or trade union membership, so please do check. 

Please also be aware that, if you pursue your case to court, there could be a costs risk to you if your case is not allocated to the small claims track and/or the Defendant convinces the court you shouldn't have brought the case.  Organisations can be very aggressive defending disability discrimination claims even though the only way to enforce equality legislation is to take your case to court.  Officially the courts are open and accessible to disabled litigants but it does not necessarily feel like that. 

This website contains useful information about discrimination claims: https://www.stammeringlaw.org.uk .

A disabled woman assisted by Kester Disability Rights has been paid £7,000 in compensation by a service provider who refused her access to a service because she was unable to wear a face mask.

The pay-out was achieved through negotiation as there was no dispute that access had been denied, or that the Claimant had a disability exemption.  The only thing to be agreed was the amount of compensation, not whether it was due or not. 

Refusing access to people unable to wear face coverings due to disability is direct discrimination - no different to denying access to a black or gay person for example.

Disabled people are now routinely harassed in public for not wearing face coverings - frequently given the impression that confidential medical information must be publicly disclosed to justify exemption.  The fact that shops and hospitality businesses routinely display "no mask no entry" signs shows how deeply disablist attitudes are embedded in society.  If premises displayed "no blacks" or "no gays" notices there would be outrage.

Fortunately the official Government position does not endorse any of this as nobody exempt from wearing a mask is expected to go around justifying themselves.  Saying "I'm exempt" is enough.  If the response to that can be proved to be discriminatory then compensation is due. 

Although the current crack-down on civil liberties is being presented as "saving the vulnerable" it's increasingly looking like the reverse is the case.

Some of the impacts of "the rules" as opposed to the virus itself include:

- Withdrawal of previously routine NHS screening and treatments (disguised by people being encouraged to say "Thank you NHS").

- People unable to wear face masks too frightened to go out.

- Systematic exclusion of people dependent on lip reading by over-use of face coverings.

- Worsening of mental health amongst those most vulnerable to suicide leading to an increase in suicide.

- Already skeletal mental health and children's disability services becoming even more minimal. 

- Steep rise in child and vulnerable adult abuse and domestic abuse generally.

- Nursing homes residents being placed in indefinite solitary confinement with only human contact with staff dressed in full PPE.

- Victims of crime denied justice indefinitely. 

Upon writing to my MP to request the Government does a proper rational analysis of the impacts of the virus itself against impact of lock-down and associated rules I have so far not had a reply.  I will keep trying as history is likely to show the current situation was as a huge mistake.   

We received this new song for Remembrance.

Kester Disability Rights has supported many suffering with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. 

People often don't realise how let down people can be by the benefits system.  Being sent this wonderful song reminded me, for example, of the Northern Ireland veteran I found sleeping rough - his ESA had been terminated because he didn't go to a personal assessment.  The letter was sent to an address from before he became street homeless. 

And I remember one man from when I worked for Citizens Advice who served in the Gulf War and was ridiculed for turning up to a personal assessment in his medals, before being disallowed benefits he was obviously entitled to. 

Although these are "no brainer" cases that it is easy to win it of course shouldn't happen in the first place.  Yet we also get abuse survivors wrongly denied benefits every month.  Hopefully the covid crisis will get more people realising that social security should be there for all who need it. 

£1, 463,194 was raised for claimants by Kester Disability Rights Ltd in its first full year of operations.  Our annual accounts show this in relation to the company's income.  A total of £27,660 in fees was charged over the 51 cases where lump sums were obtained such as to trigger a charge from KDR.  The remaining KDR income came from training and consultancy.

In round figures, claimants paid £1 for every £52 gained.  This is worked out over the life-span of the award to give an accurate reflection of costs versus benefits.  The average charge per case is £542. 

Charging claimants for services is not something I ever wanted to get into, having worked all my previous working life where I didn't have to charge.  However, the charities I worked for were never able to offer a good enough service and invariably rationed services due to lack of income. 

The KDR charging model means that the service is sustainable.  Also more can be done without the political constraints frequently at work in charities.  By being entirely independent KDR is able to challenge the DWP and other organisations in a more robust manner.  The service is also more responsive and accessible and you can see from the KDR Face Book and Instagram pages how it worked in practice for claimants who agreed to share their stories.

The accounts should appear on the Companies House website in due course.