Hi Barry
I thought I had answered your question but I am sorry if I didn't.
I do believe that what the bank is offering is acceptable, because
the blind customer is not going to be at any greater risk, or
disadvantage,
compared to the able-bodied sighted customers.
If this case was in court for a DDA judgment, how would you show
that the blind customer is at a disadvantage?
All you can show is that access to the service is being offered ina
different
way, but that's not illegal!
The bank will simply argue that as they are taking on the extra risk,
(as they do for chip and signature customers) there is no extra
risk for the blind customers. The bank will point out that they have
agreed to cover for fraud. So at end of the day, the blind customer is
no worse off comapred to any other customer.
Regards,
Derek
e-mail: derek.hornby_uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
** To leave the list, click on the immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe]
** If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
** and in the Subject line type
** unsubscribe
** For other list commands such as vacation mode, click on the
** immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq]
** or send a message, to
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the Subject:- faq
