The DDA Law Explained

Trying to understand the DDA law and its impact on website owners can be confusing, here is a simple overview:

• If your site is not accessible to disabled users then you are potentially breaking the law
• Providing an accessible alternative is not acceptable
• The law applies to all sites regardless of when they were created
• You are expected to make "reasonable adjustments" to your site (governed by various factors)
• Compliance with the World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Guidelines is currently the best way to ensure compliance

What does this mean for websites?

The UK Disability Discrimination Act 1995 provides a set of laws to ensure people with disabilities are not discriminated against. The act will be introduced in three stages:

• Since 2 December 1996 it has been against the law for service providers to treat you less favourably because of your disability.
• Since 1 October 1999 service providers have had to make "reasonable adjustments" for you, such as giving extra help or changing the way they provide their services.
• From 1 October 2004 service providers may have to make other "reasonable adjustments" to their services so that there are no physical barriers stopping or making it unreasonably difficult for you to use the service.

Essentially this means that service providers have had to comply with this law since October 1999.

What is reasonable?

The Code indicates that what is a reasonable step for a particular service provider will vary on a case-by-case basis depending on:

• The type of services being provided;
• The nature of the service provider and its size and resources.
• The Code goes further and provides a non-exhaustive list of factors to be taken into account when considering what is reasonable:
• Whether taking any particular steps would be effective in overcoming the difficulty that disabled people face in accessing the services in question;
• The extent to which it is practicable for the service provider to take the steps;
• The financial and other costs of making the adjustment;
• The extent of any disruption which taking the steps would cause;
• The extent of the service provider's financial and other resources;
• The amount of any resources already spent on making adjustments; and
• The availability of financial or other assistance.

Financial constraints may be considered reasonable for physical adjustments to buildings but it is unlikely that website providers can rely on such a reason as sites evolve with new layouts and functionality on a relatively frequent basis. Therefore there is little excuse for not taking account of the guidelines in new versions or updated versions of their sites.

Court Action

The DDA law means that companies may be liable for court action if found to be discriminating. This has not been tested in a UK court as yet although 2 companies have been sued with the help of the RNIB, with both cases being settled out of court.

If a company is found to have breached the act they will face a fine, have to fix the problems and pay damages to the claimant. In a landmark Australian court case the damages awarded were AUS $20,000 (£10,000 GBP). In addition to these financial costs is the damage to the company image and brand which is far harder to quantify.

The fact that companies such as Tesco, Standard Life Investments and the Royal Mail have recently created accessible versions of their sites proves that businesses are slowly awakening to the issue of accessibility and the consequences of failing to comply.

The Disability Rights Commission Report

The Disability Rights Commission has recently published a report which analysed 1,000 websites in the UK for compliance. Less than 8% of the sites conformed to the most basic level of compliance with no sites reaching full compliance (WAI Level 1, 2 and 3). In the UK, the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) is monitoring the situation of web accessibility and following the DRC report may bring a test case to court in the very near future.

The Australian test case stated that compliance with the World Wide Web Consortium guidelines on accessibility equates to compliance with the DDA. Although Australian cases are not regarded as authority for cases in the United Kingdom, they can be considered as a valid benchmark. Therefore it is reasonable to expect that if and when a case is brought against a company in the United Kingdom that the courts will follow the lead set in Australia and expect sites to comply with the W3C guidelines and provide an accessible site.

How to Comply

Compliance is an on-going duty so it is also important for website owners to monitor 'technological developments which may provide new or better solutions to the problems of inaccessible services'. This menas that even if a Web site was designed before the introduction of the WAI guidelines, that they should still be adhered to as they are a new 'standard'.

Basically this means complying with levels 1 and 2 of the World Wide Web Consortium guidelines on accessibility. These guidleines should be considered and included (as much as possible) in all new web development to protect against future major re-work and possible discrimination charges.

The impact of making these changes or incorporating the guidelines into future development is relatively small. Generally, extra steps are required at design and development stages of a project along with extended testing to ensure these guidelines have been met. The relative cost of adding these steps is minimal.

The impact of making these changes to existing sites or products is much bigger, a thorough review of the various sites would be required to assess the impact and cost of this.

Related Links:

1. How we can help you review or develop a site
2. World Wide Web Consortium - Web Accessibility Intiative (opens in new window)
3. Disability Rights Commission - Website Review Report (opens in new window)