TIR - failure to provide alternative format

[kijeta]

I was issued a TIR (completely legally) well over a month ago, and I sent an email to the TOC to request an alternative format (specifically, UEB edit: English Braille) the next day. I don't think mentioning the particular TOC in question would be helpful here, but happy to do so in a future comment if it will make a difference.

Over the course of the last month, they have made various excuses for refusing to fulfil the request, such as accusing me of attempting to make an appeal (I have expressed no intention in making any appeals, as TIRs can't be appealed in the first place). From the start of August, they have completely stopped replying to my chase-ups.

The questions I'd like to ask are:
1) Am I entitled to any alternative formats for TIRs issued to me in the first place?
2) If so, what would a reasonable timeframe be?
3) Would I be due any compensation?

Thanks!

 

[Adam Williams]

I imagine disabled individuals could pursue legal action under the Equality Act if there was an unreasonable refusal to entertain a legitimate request for the information to be provided in an alternative, more accessible format.

 

[Snow1964]

As the abbreviation wasn't explained, UEB is Unified English Braille.

I wonder if the non replies, is they have dropped it, having commercially decided that translation and follow up costs mean irregularity is not worth pursuing, but have rather rudely not said so, so leaving Op in Limbo, regarding if they intend to continue or not.

 

[ikcdab]

The equality act only applies if the request is reasonable. It's difficult to see how a tir could practically be supplied in Braille. Another solution such as asking someone else to read it to you would be simpler.
You need to deal with this otherwise I fear a single justice procedure heading your way

 

[[.n]]

The equality act only applies if the request is reasonable. It's difficult to see how a tir could practically be supplied in Braille. Another solution such as asking someone else to read it to you would be simpler.
You need to deal with this otherwise I fear a single justice procedure heading your way

Not massively tricky - in something the size of a TOC, there should be a reasonable likelihood they have a Braille embosser around and the required software.

I think this would be a reasonable request - in fact for example (according to railways codes website) there is a Braille sign at Great Yarmouth celebrating 200 years of the railway

If fact according to the government advice https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inclusive-communication/accessible-communication-formats I think you might even be able to ask for the SJP in Braille!!

6.1 Braille​

Around 7% of people who are registered blind or partially sighted use braille, and there are estimated to be around 26,000 braille users in the UK.

Braille readers are often influential and active members of the blind community and may pass information on to other blind people.

Provide braille to those who request it. To ensure value for money, you may want to make an assessment of the likelihood of it being requested based on the target audience for your communication.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The equality act only applies if the request is reasonable.

A blind person asking for a TIR in braille is entirely reasonable. It isn’t for the disabled person to ask someone else to read confidential correspondence to them.

 

[Swedenorer]

There were Stainsby machines years ago - there must be a modern equivalent.

 

[AlterEgo]

Is the TOC GTR, with whom you have corresponded extensively before?

 

[mmh]

A blind person asking for a TIR in braille is entirely reasonable. It isn’t for the disabled person to ask someone else to read confidential correspondence to them.

That's not the meaning of reasonable here, and what is being suggested isn't that the person asks someone to read it for them, rather that the TOC could offer to read it - which is something that does happen in practice.

In this case though, I wouldn't be surprised if there's an element of vexatiousness to the request.

 

[kijeta]

I ought to clarify as I don't think I made it clear in the original post - I obtained this TIR completely legally. To the best of my knowledge, I did not break any (bye-)laws on that journey.
Therefore, I think any SJPs are likely to be undue.

Additionally, I did verbally request an alternative format (just a screenreader compatible email would do) on the spot to the member of staff that issued it. She also interrogated me about the braille sticker on my disabled person's railcard - which was applied before even sending the railcard to me. She even attempted to remove the sticker in order to see what's underneath it.

is they have dropped it

I too have a suspicion it has been dropped, but surely that doesn't mean I won't get to touch a document that has been issued directly to me.

there is a Braille sign at Great Yarmouth

I also appreciate braille wayfinder boards in larger stations, off the top of my head, Sheffield and Exeter St Davids have wayfinder boards at their entrances, correctly angled too. Those are much more than virtue signalling.

translation [...] costs

There were Stainsby machines years ago - there must be a modern equivalent.

Personally, I use an Index V5 braille printer - which cannot be any easier to use. Even from a linux machine like I use, the drivers still parse pdf files automatically. Usage requires no more steps compared to an ink printer, except having to manually rip the paper off the feeder at the end of printing. The only costs would be the heavier paper, which is significantly lower than any costs of natural language translation.

Is the TOC GTR, with whom you have corresponded extensively before?

No. It's LNER.

You need to deal with this otherwise I fear a single justice procedure heading your way

What would you recommend I do to deal with this?

 

[skyhigh]

I ought to clarify as I don't think I made it clear in the original post - I obtained this TIR completely legally. To the best of my knowledge, I did not break any (bye-)laws on that journey.

What was the reason for it being issued then? If you tell us what happened, we may be able to provide better advice.

 

[kijeta]

What was the reason for it being issued then? If you tell us what happened, we may be able to provide better advice.

Thanks, but at this stage, I do not believe I need any advice on the irregularity itself yet. Not until I manage to get an accessible format of it in the first place...!

Edit to add: My understanding is an authorised member of railway staff can issue TIRs for any reason, they do not need to witness fare evasion for that?

 

[AlterEgo]

Edit to add: My understanding is an authorised member of railway staff can issue TIRs for any reason, they do not need to witness fare evasion for that?

That is correct. It is a way of withdrawing incorrect or mis-issued tickets and receiving one is not necessarily an indication of wrongdoing.

 

[ikcdab]

I don't follow. You say you obtained the TIR "legally" but that you didn't break any bylaws.
So are you saying you didn't evade any fares or otherwise act irregularly? If so then you have nothing else to worry about. If you did evade fares (etc) then just pay what you owe and move on.

 

[WesternLancer]

What would you recommend I do to deal with this?

Perhaps put your issue to them in writing (?) - I realise you may need help with that depending on the tech at your disposal so apols if that is not viable.

I think I'd be tempted to put it in writing to them in braille using the Brialle printer.

 

[kijeta]

I don't follow. You say you obtained the TIR "legally" but that you didn't break any bylaws.

By "legally", I mean that both I and the LNER staff remained legal throughout the journey - I did not fare evade etc.
I don't think she needs a reason to issue a TIR. Not suggesting in any way that this is what happened on that day, but in the hypothetical extreme situation where she issued a TIR "because she's bored" or "for the fun of it", I believe that still wouldn't be illegal, just at most potentially breaching company policy. I am therefore not blaming her at all for issuing a TIR.
This isn't like detention, where exercising their right inappropriately constitutes false imprisonment. They are entitled to issue a TIR whenever they want.

So are you saying you didn't evade any fares or otherwise act irregularly? If so then you have nothing else to worry about. If you did evade fares (etc) then just pay what you owe and move on.

Not receiving an accessible version of a document that is directly issued to me is precisely what I am worried about.
This is a TIR, so there's no figure of what I owe (if any).

I realise you may need help with that

That's what social workers are here for!

I think I'd be tempted to put it in writing to them in braille using the Brialle printer.

As tempting as that is, that might veer into "vexatious" territory. I might provide the letter in both ink and braille copies, however, just to prove the point about how easy it is.

 

[Kath123]

Hello

I am not one of the experts on the forum. I am a member of the public.

I am visually impaired but have never learnt braille.

My belief and understanding is that under the Equality Act 2010 you are entitled to receive an accessible copy of the TIR including in braille if this is your request. Or as you say in a screenreader compatible e-mail.

I agree with what @WesternLancer said. I don’t think it would be wrong to send LNER a letter in braille if that is your usual method of communication.

A few other thoughts:

I obviously don’t know who you have been communicating with at LNER but have you asked to speak to an Accessibility Manager or someone in a similar role?

Have you tried contacting the RNIB Helpline for advice? I think their number is 0303 123 9999. I know that a few years ago they had a legal team and hopefully they still have this but regardless hopefully they can advise you.

I hope you manage to get things sorted.

 

[walkingsophie]

Hi, I have also received a TIR from LNER, and on the TIR it said

"If you need this notice in a different format such as large print or braille, or in another language, email debtrecovery@lner.co.uk for assistance."

The fact that LNER has failed to provide a Braille copy despite promising one definitely reflects quite badly on them. Hopefully OP can get the help they need here to make sure LNER provides Braille copies to people who request them.

 

[Starmill]

The equality act only applies if the request is reasonable. It's difficult to see how a tir could practically be supplied in Braille. Another solution such as asking someone else to read it to you would be simpler.

This isn't correct in the slightest. Braille is commonly used by train operators both on request and also on new signage, for example on handles and banisters.

The OP says that they told the inspector that they were happy to receive the notice in braille or electronic text format. This alone is all that's required for the company to have acted. If they haven't yet done so, that's completely on them. Neither option is difficult.

 

[gray1404]

It is extremely concerning that a member of staff has taken issue with a braille sticker being on a disabled person's railcard, given this will have been applied by the disabled person's rail card office. Additionally they attempted to remove such a sticker. LNER definitely needs to be made aware of this.

Another member has asked the original poster for the full details as to why a TIR was issued. However the original poster has said that they do not wish to provide these details and we cannot compel them. Such information would be helpful. We would then be able to establish if it was issued correctly or not and under appropriate circumstances. However we cannot compel the OP.

The original poster is incorrect on a number of statements that they make even though they are convinced they are right. One such statement is when they imply a TIR can just be issued.

 

[island]

The focus with reasonable adjustments is overcoming the person's disability, not necessarily providing the exact type of adjustment they ask for. In this case, providing the contents of the TIR in an electronic format would be a valid adjustment; it does not necessarily have to be Braille. That being said, LNER have offered to provide it in Braille, so they should deliver on that offer, assuming the OP has emailed the above-mentioned address to ask for it. It is not a reasonable adjustment for someone to read the document to the disabled person, not least because it is a complex document and the disabled person may need to read and refer to it a number of times.

 

[Tetchytyke]

That's not the meaning of reasonable here, and what is being suggested isn't that the person asks someone to read it for them, rather that the TOC could offer to read it - which is something that does happen in practice.

Simply reading it out is not a reasonable adjustment. I think the person I was replying to was meaning get a friend to read it, but it doesn’t really matter. It is the type of document that may have to be referred to on several occasions and should be provided in a format which is accessible to the disabled person whenever that person needs to access it. It is entirely reasonable for the disabled person to request that document in an accessible format and it is a reasonable adjustment for the issuer of that document to make.

It doesn’t have to be braille, for instance it could be in an electronic format which is compatible with a screen reader.

In this case though, I wouldn't be surprised if there's an element of vexatiousness to the request.

The OP may well be seeking to make a point but that doesn’t make the request unreasonable, the adjustment unreasonable, or the request vexatious.

 

[Starmill]

Simply reading it out is not a reasonable adjustment. I think the person I was replying to was meaning get a friend to read it, but it doesn’t really matter. It is the type of document that may have to be referred to on several occasions and should be provided in a format which is accessible to the disabled person whenever that person needs to access it. It is entirely reasonable for the disabled person to request that document in an accessible format and it is a reasonable adjustment for the issuer of that document to make.

It doesn’t have to be braille, for instance it could be in an electronic format which is compatible with a screen reader.


The OP may well be seeking to make a point but that doesn’t make the request unreasonable, the adjustment unreasonable, or the request vexatious.

Indeed. Given the electronic screen-reader's compatible version would cost the company ~£0, if anything, by ignoring the straightforward request, the company has been vexatious.

The OP has already mentioned being happy with that option.