Page 1 of 1

Miffed

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:54 am
by laurie53
Earlier this week I had a council document through the post, and went to the local office to get a large print copy.

I was a bit stunned to be told there would be a charge.

Am I being a bit unreasonable thinking it is wrong to charge for disability options that are normally free?

I'm going to contact my local councillor and the blind institute, but I just wondered what the feeling was here.

Re: Miffed

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 12:35 pm
by Penny
I suppose there are two ways of looking at this. Laurie. One I think they should have done it for you, two, people say they have to cover costs of working for the council. Very annoying which ever way you look at it. If it was only a few pence I wouldn't bother. cheers Penny.

Re: Miffed

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 12:49 pm
by laurie53
It's not the money, Penny, but having to pay for something most folk get free.

Suppose it is a bill and I don't pay it because I can't see it? Will they prosecute?

I'm aware of council financial constraints but I'm not sure that asking the partially sighted to pay for things that the fully sighted get free is an entirely equitable way of doing things!

Re: Miffed

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:07 pm
by Penny
Fully agree with you Laurie. It's just that I have got to the stage where I have had enough. No one seems to care these days. Sorry not to have been more help. cheers Penny

Re: Miffed

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:19 pm
by Andere Richtingen
I think the charge is an outrageous imposition!
I would be doubly outraged if I then found out that foreign-language versions of the same document were still free of charge. That might be worth enquiring about, Laurie so that your local councillor can be reminded that visually impaired, English speaking residents do have a vote and are prepared to use it....
I have long been incensed by all the free translation services offered to those who can't be bothered to learn English. The reverse most assuredly does not happen in the rest of Europe. There are many areas where local authorities could usefully economize but penalizing the partially sighted is not the way to go.

Re: Miffed

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 2:16 pm
by dita
Andere I just have to back you up on that subject, it is spot on.

Re: Miffed

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:06 pm
by caroljoyce
I agree with every word Andere says. :exactly:

Re: Miffed

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:27 pm
by laurie53
Penny wrote:Fully agree with you Laurie. It's just that I have got to the stage where I have had enough. No one seems to care these days. Sorry not to have been more help. cheers Penny


I'm with you there, Penny, and I know what you mean.

I really ought to take Sainsburys to the Equalities Commissioner for refusing to deliver to me, but I just can't be bothered with the hassle!

Thank you all for your comments.

Re: Miffed

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2019 9:31 pm
by Maywalk
I fully agree with you Andere and if it was me I would soon be on to not only to my local councillor but to the newspapers as well.
It wants showing up. :evil:

Re: Miffed

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:24 am
by laurie53
I have had a response.

It was a fully discussed and fully publicised decision to cut down on the provision of hard copy of materiel available on line.

Unpalatable though it is, it's not unreasonable.

We disabled are forever saying we want to be treated the same as everyone else!

The annoying thing is, I've got an A3 printer, but I can't read the damned screen, even with a glass!