Time limits to issue claim - failure to make reasonable adjsutments

[heisenberg]

Re: Time limits to issue claim - failure to make reasonable adjsutments

Just pre-empting the possibility is all! (& I did say I was joking :taunt

My solicitor did say he sued the court for failing to make reasonable adjustments (though the case settled). :tinysmile_twink_t2:

[charitynjw]

Re: Time limits to issue claim - failure to make reasonable adjsutments

My solicitor did say he sued the court for failing to make reasonable adjustments (though the case settled). :tinysmile_twink_t2:

Court caught in out of court, eh!



(That works on so many levels, lol!)

[heisenberg]

Re: Time limits to issue claim - failure to make reasonable adjsutments

Court caught in out of court, eh!



(That works on so many levels, lol!)

[mariefab]

Re: Time limits to issue claim - failure to make reasonable adjsutments

"Even if you could show that receiving an outcome you did not want did in some way put you at a substantial disadvantage as a disabled person, I am not sure what adjustments you are suggesting that would have alleviated that substantial disadvantage, other than starting the process again in the hope that a different outcome would be reached."

Even if you could show that your proposed PCP put you at a substantial disadvantage compared to a non-disabled person, what next?
What reasonable adjustment should they have made?

I can't imagine that going through the process again would have achieved anything but a duplication of all the previous responses. So, I wouldn't call that a reasonable adjustment.

You wanted a full breakdown of the rationale used in every aspect of your complaint. But in the absence of any evidence that those dealing with your complaint deliberately withheld information or intentionally made their responses unclear and confusing; it's reasonable to assume that they did the best they could.

Their best may be crap, in your opinion, and non-disabled complainers may agree.
Where does that get you?
It would be unreasonable to expect the organisation to acquire a fresh group of employees in the hope that you would like their responses better.

[heisenberg]

Re: Time limits to issue claim - failure to make reasonable adjsutments

Even if you could show that your proposed PCP put you at a substantial disadvantage compared to a non-disabled person, what next?
What reasonable adjustment should they have made?

A full breakdown was all I asked and I don't think that was a lot to ask for. I envisage that would have taken them 10-15 minutes of their precious time.

I can't imagine that going through the process again would have achieved anything but a duplication of all the previous responses. So, I wouldn't call that a reasonable adjustment.

If they had provided a full breakdown I would have understood their position in regards to every aspect of my complaint. I would then have tailored my next complaint against the therapist more reasonably and sought to present the necessary evidence. It would be inapt to automatically infer the outcome would be the same. If the outcome would inevitably be the same there would be no point in the provision of allowing complainants to submit a complaint for a second and final time.

You wanted a full breakdown of the rationale used in every aspect of your complaint. But in the absence of any evidence that those dealing with your complaint deliberately withheld information or intentionally made their responses unclear and confusing; it's reasonable to assume that they did the best they could.

I argue that when I pointed out that there is scope for confusion they simply ignored my concerns. I would have expected any reasonable person in his/her professional capacity to address these valid concerns squarely. I maintain they did not do anything near the best they could as they simply regarded me as a 'nuisance' and gave me nor my disability any further consideration other than that. To that end, they have deliberately withheld information (let's also not forget about the fact that they have deliberately failed to comply with the CPR on more than once occasion).

Their best may be crap, in your opinion, and non-disabled complainers may agree.
Where does that get you?
It would be unreasonable to expect the organisation to acquire a fresh group of employees in the hope that you would like their responses better.

As above, I wasn't asking for a lot. Arguably a failure to make reasonable adjustments is providing a crap service. Have you noted the fact that the Professional Standards Authority found their decision-making to be crap? Perhaps the penny dropped hence the fact they were not forthcoming with any rationale or they were simply bias because I suffer from a severe mental impairment and the therapist does not (which would possibly amount to direct/indirect discrimination/aiding discrimination).

[heisenberg]

Re: Time limits to issue claim - failure to make reasonable adjsutments

Even if you could show that your proposed PCP put you at a substantial disadvantage compared to a non-disabled person, what next?
What reasonable adjustment should they have made?

A full breakdown was all I asked and I don't think that was a lot to ask for. I envisage that would have taken them 10-15 minutes of their precious time.

I can't imagine that going through the process again would have achieved anything but a duplication of all the previous responses. So, I wouldn't call that a reasonable adjustment.

If they had provided a full breakdown I would have understood their position in regards to every aspect of my complaint. I would then have tailored my next complaint against the therapist more reasonably and sought to present the necessary evidence. It would be inapt to automatically infer the outcome would be the same. If the outcome would inevitably be the same there would be no point in the provision of allowing complainants to submit a complaint for a second and final time.

You wanted a full breakdown of the rationale used in every aspect of your complaint. But in the absence of any evidence that those dealing with your complaint deliberately withheld information or intentionally made their responses unclear and confusing; it's reasonable to assume that they did the best they could.

I argue that when I pointed out that there is scope for confusion they simply ignored my concerns. I would have expected any reasonable person in his/her professional capacity to address these valid concerns squarely. I maintain they did not do anything near the best they could as they simply regarded me as a 'nuisance' and gave me nor my disability any further consideration other than that. To that end, they have deliberately withheld information (let's also not forget about the fact that they have deliberately failed to comply with the CPR on more than once occasion).

Their best may be crap, in your opinion, and non-disabled complainers may agree.
Where does that get you?
It would be unreasonable to expect the organisation to acquire a fresh group of employees in the hope that you would like their responses better.

As above, I wasn't asking for a lot. Arguably a failure to make reasonable adjustments is providing a crap service. Have you noted the fact that the Professional Standards Authority found their decision-making to be crap? Perhaps the penny dropped hence the fact they were not forthcoming with any rationale or they were simply bias because I suffer from a severe mental impairment and the therapist does not (which would possibly amount to direct/indirect discrimination/aiding discrimination).

The Court of Appeal have further addressed this point in Griffiths v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

In their Judgment, the Court of Appeal rejected the Secretary of State’s contention that the appropriate comparator in a reasonable adjustments claim should be identified by applying the like-for-like test adopted by the House of Lords in Lewisham London Borough Council v Malcolm [2008] 1 AC 1399.

Full Judgment here:

http://www.oldsquare.co.uk/images/up...5_judgment.pdf

[heisenberg]

Re: Time limits to issue claim - failure to make reasonable adjsutments

Anyone know of any case law in respect to what constitutes a 'provision, criterion or practice'?

I have found this case (see para. 18):

http://www.employmentcasesupdate.co....aspx?i=ed13902

However, that is an EAT Judgment which is seemingly not binding on a County Court.