Mrs E Trellis
Lytleton House
22 Stryd y Dwysoges
North Wales

Mr S Blue
Court Manager
The Trumpton Combined Court Centre
Jeffries Street
Trumpton
Trumptonshire

1 November 2004

Dear Mr Blue,

I am writing to bring to your attention my visit to the Trumpton Combined Court Centre on 29 October 2004. I attended as a witness for the claimant in the case of Smith v Jones. 

I am hard of hearing, and use two hearing aids to help me to hear and understand what people are saying. I would need to use an induction loop or infrared broadcast system to enable me to follow what was being said in the courtroom. Without a loop or infrared system, I cannot understand what is being said because peoples’ voices tend to echo in the courtroom. 

Mr Smith’s solicitors wrote to you on 19 January 2004 and explained that I would need an induction loop or infrared system in order for me to hear the questions from the lawyers or anything said by the judge. The solicitors told me that the court had written back on 27 January 2004 to say that there was an infrared broadcast system fitted, and that there were neckloops available.

When I arrived at court on 1 March, I noticed that there was a small notice that said that infrared broadcast systems were fitted in the court. Mr Jagged, Mr Smith’s solicitor spoke to the usher, and then came to speak to me. He told me that there was a problem. I was able to follow what Mr Jagged was saying, as we had gone into a quiet conference room, and I was also able to lipread him. Mr Jagged said that there was a problem with the neckloop, which is the equipment which I needed to use the infrared system. Mr Jagged asked the usher to come into the room. The usher told me that there were no neckloops available and no alternative equipment. 

I went into the courtroom to see if I could manage without the equipment. However, because the room was large and echoed, it was clear that I could not cope without the loop as I could not hear what was being said to me. This meant that I could not give evidence on 1 March, and had to come back the following day by which time you had obtained a neckloop. This created a serious problem for me as I had to cancel an appointment with my GP and take additional annual leave.

As the court had gone to the expense of fitting an infrared system, I had expected that all the equipment would be available, particularly as you had told the solicitors that it would be.

As you may be aware, Part III of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) states that it is unlawful for service providers to discriminate against disabled people by providing them with a lower standard of service, or service on worse terms for reasons relating to their disability. Also, since 1 October 1999, you have been required to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to let disabled customers access your services. This includes altering practices, policies and procedures that make it impossible or unreasonably difficult for disabled people to make use of your service. It also includes providing auxiliary aids and services. Auxiliary aids include induction loops and infrared systems. 

Under the DDA, it is your responsibility to ensure that any ‘auxiliary aids’ you provide are carefully chosen and properly maintained. Induction loop systems must be installed in accordance with British Standard 7594. Neckloop receivers, as worn by hearing aid wearers using these systems, should conform to British Standard 6083, part IV. You should have signs clearly on display to indicate the presence of such equipment and staff should be aware of how auxiliary aids such as induction loops or infrared systems work and how to use them.

I enclose copies of the following factsheets produced by RNID, which provide more information about your legal duties and working with induction loops and infrared systems:

Please consider the serious issues that my experience has raised. I look forward to receiving your written response within 21 days.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Yours sincerely

Mrs E Trellis