We briefly reported the case of Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc v Allen [2009] EWCA at the end of 2009 but we thought it might have implications for so many of our customers that we asked the employment team at PwC to take a closer look at the details.

Introduction
The Royal Bank of Scotland (“RBS”) has recently become the first service provider to be given a compulsory building alteration injunction under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (“the DDA”). The Court of Appeal issued its judgement regarding an appeal by RBS against an injunction imposed by Sheffield County Court, ordering the bank to install a platform lift to allow disabled access at an estimated cost of £200,000.

The Facts
In RBS v Allen [2009] EWCA Civ 1213, the Court of Appeal issued its finding following the county court case which heard that the plaintiff, who has muscular dystrophy, could not access his local RBS branch in Sheffield as there was no wheel chair access. Consequently, when the Plaintiff on one occasion sought to open a savings account, he had to hold the discussion with bank staff on the street outside the bank.

The Claimant launched legal proceedings after the RBS failed to make the branch accessible. RBS argued that the Plaintiff could use internet or telephone banking facilities and they also arranged access for him to 3 other branches. The Plaintiff argued that he wanted to have banking facilities as close as possible to him and that he wanted a service in which he could speak to staff over the counter, as any other customer could.

RBS enquired about the cost of installing a lift and were given an estimate of £200,000. However, they did not raise the issue of the disproportionate cost of carrying out the work; instead, they referred to the fact that they would lose the use of an interview room.

The Decision
In delivering the judgement, Lord Justice Dyson said: “The public at large have physical access to banks in order to make use of traditional counter banking services and the bank’s non-disabled customers have physical access to all of its branches, including the main branch”. Accordingly, he found that the bank’s reliance on the alternative methods available was not a reasonable one, unless there was no reasonable way of affording Mr Allen physical access to the main branch. RBS was therefore ordered to undertake the £200,000 alterations, pay the Plaintiff’s legal costs and provide him with compensation in the sum of £6,500. Permission was also refused for the case to be further appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Implications
This case sets a significant precedent. Many hundreds of cases are brought against employers each year on the basis of disability discrimination, but of these, only a very small proportion is brought by service users. The goods and services provisions of the DDA require businesses to make “reasonable adjustments” to ensure that their customers can use their services. Clearly these adjustments can include making alterations to buildings, despite the significant costs that this can bring.
http://bit.ly/4CgbJt

Case report and comments from The Times:
http://bit.ly/4ZGq93