Severely disabled woman 'forced out' of van during Portsmouth port search as angry couple threaten to sue

An angry man is threatening to sue Portsmouth International Port after his disabled wife was ‘forced out’ of their vehicle during security searches.

Peter Forster, of Northallerton in North Yorkshire, was exasperated when his partner Fiona was asked to step out of their campervan during random routine checks. He said this caused her serious pain and discomfort.

After issuing a complaint, the 76-year-old is considering legal action as he believes the port quoted “fake legislation” and ignored his wife’s human rights under the Equality Act.

But the city council-owned port denied this and said these searches are necessary as part of Port Facility Security Instruction (PFSI) issued by the Department for Transport (DfT).

The Forsters were starting their journey to their second house in France on May 20 when the incident took place. “I was completely taken aback,” the retired marketing lecturer told The News.

“This is something we never anticipated at all. I’m just so angry about the whole thing.”

Mr Forster said Fiona has six different disabilities including disintegrated discs in her back, and Peripheral Neuropathy - pain caused by damaged nerves in her extremities. The retired law lecturer was recently recovering from a stroke at the time of search.

“She’s a walking medical dictionary,” Mr Forster said. After pulling up their campervan before heading towards their ferry, Mr Forster said stern security guards asked the pair to exit the vehicle using “forceful language”.

“The van is high off the ground,” he said. “Getting in and out of it takes considerable effort. We’ve gone through these security checks in the past here and at other ports.

“Sometimes they ask us to get out of the vehicle, but I let them know they have to continue their inspections with my wife seated as she’s severely disabled and suffers pain and discomfort when she transfers.

“Every other time, they said no problem, but on this occasion, they said it was procedure and forced her out. They didn’t physically, they just insisted we couldn’t load onto the ship unless we co-operated. She did in the end with great discomfort.”

Mr Forster said Fiona suffered sharp sporadic pains and spasms in her back, with severe aches in her limbs. The couple raised a complaint on June 12, which was rejected on July 15.

The port’s reply, shown in documents seen by The News, said it’s “a legal requirement that passengers leave the vehicle empty when searches are conducted, under the Port Facility Security Instructions (PFSI)”. They added that mandatory statutory regulations require passengers to exit a vehicle for security searches, irrespective of disability.

A letter by the DfT to Mr Forster seen by The News said “there is no general requirement imposed by the DfT that all passengers, irrespective of their individual circumstances, must leave a vehicle in order for a search to be conducted”. The response said “reasonable adjustments” need to be made for disabled people.

Mr Forster said the port’s actions contravened the Equality Act 2010, with the pair worried about a future journey. “My wife is reluctant to go, but we’re in the process of selling our house,” he said. “My wife needs 24 hour care, so I can’t go on my own.

“We have considered other ports. I accept these searches have to take place, but it’s clear there are no statutory regulations to how that methodology is carried out. They’re not forbidden to make adjustments, and should consider them for disabled people.”

A Portsmouth International Port spokesperson said: “The comfort and safety of all our travelling customers is very important to us. We maintain maritime security searches, which are subject to compliance checks by the DfT.

"In order that DfT mandated searches can be undertaken without compromise, our security staff are trained to make sure when passengers leave any vehicle, appropriate assistance and adjustments are made while they wait. Asking passengers to leave their vehicles is a reasonable and necessary step to help us carry out security checks safely and effectively.

"We can’t comment on individual cases, but our procedures are in line with other ports and follow strict guidance concerning the need to balance equalities and security legislation."

Sign up for our free newsletters and let the headlines come straight to you

The DfT has issued guidance around the legislation. Ports are responsible for determining the specific security procedures in line with their approved Port Facility Security Plan (PFSP). When a security procedure is included in a PFSP, the port is legally required to follow it.

Under the Equality Act, the Public Sector Equality Duty means public bodies have to consider all individuals when carrying out day-to-day work. They have a duty to ensure that equality issues are proactively considered.

The act states that “reasonable adjustments” need to be considered before a disabled person needs to access their services or facilities. These alterations need to make sure a disabled person would not be put at a substantial disadvantage compared to able-bodied people.

A failure to do can be deemed as discrimination, but the act says what is “reasonable” will vary on a case by case basis. Policies such as the extent of security checks can be considered proportionate if they achieve a legitimate aim.

A government spokesperson said: “We are sorry to hear about Fiona’s experience, and understand security checks can be a difficult experience for some passengers, and we take the needs of disabled travellers seriously. Ports are required to follow their approved specific security procedures and, if needed, should make reasonable adjustments wherever possible."