Research and analysis

Accessibility of private sector products and services for disabled people in the UK

Published 17 July 2025

1. Executive summary

Background

The development of the National Disability Strategy found that more evidence is needed about disabled people’s access to, and experience of, physical and digital products and services. As a first step, the Disability Unit (DU) commissioned the Research Institute for Disabled Consumers (RiDC) to develop research to better understand the barriers experienced by disabled people in different sectors and at different stages of the customer journey. 

A survey was designed by RiDC, working with an advisory group of 12 ‘experts by experience’. This group helped shape the research and interpret survey results. Two focus groups were also conducted.

The survey ran from 12 September to 19 October 2023. The survey was shared through RiDC’s network and through social media, and respondents to the survey were self-selecting. There were 1,545 valid and fully completed responses. Data was also collected on impairment type and other demographic characteristics.

Aims and objectives

The aims of the research were to:

• explore the accessibility of sectors for disabled people and how these sectors were used   
• understand the barriers disabled people face at each stage of the customer journey
• explore what could help improve disabled people’s experiences in accessing private sector products and services

Scope

This research asked questions about the following sectors:

• wellbeing, personal care and beauty
• financial and legal services
• retail 
• technology
• sports and exercise  
• entertainment, leisure and hospitality 
• household goods and services
• couriers, delivery and postal services
• other 

Other sectors, such as transport, private health care, medication or aids, were excluded as there was a high degree of overlap between public and private sector products or services, or because existing research was already available.

Main findings

Access barriers by sector 

Respondents were asked to select all sectors in which they had experienced barriers or accessibility issues in the previous 12 months. The 3 sectors in which respondents most frequently reported access barriers were:

• retail (65% of respondents)
• entertainment and hospitality (57%)
• wellbeing, personal care and beauty (49%)

In all impairment groups, retail was the sector with the highest proportion of respondents reporting access barriers. The percentage ranged from 61% of those with a hearing impairment to 80% of those with a dexterity impairment.

People with a social impairment were most likely to report experiencing barriers in the financial (45%) and sport (53%) sectors.

People with a learning impairment were most likely to report experiencing barriers in the wellbeing (62%) and household goods and services (50%) sectors.

In the technology sector, the highest percentage of respondents experiencing a barrier were those with a vision impairment (47%), while in the entertainment sector it was respondents with a dexterity impairment (68%).

Inaccessible products and services by subsector

For each sector that respondents had identified as their top 3 most inaccessible, they were asked in which (single) subsector they experienced the most barriers or accessibility issues when trying to buy or use products and services in each sector. For each sector, the least accessible subsectors were as follows:

• wellbeing: hairdressers, barbers and beauticians (35% of respondents)
• finance and legal: banking products and services (56%)
• retail: groceries and grocery shopping (37%)
• technology: phone, computer or tablet hardware or software (41%)
• sport and exercise: gyms and leisure centres (65%)
• entertainment and hospitality: restaurants, cafes and food establishments (24%)
• household goods and services: white goods and kitchen appliances (23%)
• couriers and delivery services: online shopping delivery services (29%)

Least accessible stages of the customer journey 

The research also asked about respondents’ experiences at 8 stages of the customer journey:

• searching for and researching the products or services
• finding accessibility information on a specific product or service
• travelling to and from buying or using the product or service
• buying the product or service
• using or accessing the product or service
• dealing with customer services post purchase
• returning faulty or badly advertised products
• other

The findings indicate that respondents faced barriers at each stage of the customer journey, and that overcoming these barriers came at a cost to respondents in terms of money, energy, time and social interaction. The customer journey stage that appeared most problematic to respondents was using or accessing the product or service, while the sector that was most challenging across the whole customer journey for respondents was the Technology sector. 

Common challenges identified across all sectors included inaccessible information or services, inaccessible building and infrastructure, inaccessible product design or use and negative attitudes from staff or the public.

Recommendations

Respondents were also asked a multiple-choice question on the most important single thing the government could do to make products and services more accessible. The most common answer was making accessibility standards mandatory rather than voluntary (40%), followed by developing inclusive design principles (16%). 

Throughout open text survey questions and focus groups, respondents gave their input on how to tackle inaccessibility across the sectors and customer journey, these responses have been grouped into 4 themes: 

• working together: using co-design to develop an accessibility framework for government and the private sectors – businesses should work with disabled consumers to understand the customer journey and how their policies, practices and products can enable or disable people
• build accessible environments: have digital and physical spaces be built around accessibility requirements
• enable support: build accessible support networks and provide disability training for staff, tailored to the sector and needs of disabled consumers
• standardisation and enforcement: create detailed and enforceable accessibility requirements for private sectors to meet a broad range of access needs and enable widespread accessibility – respondents saw this as important to reduce compounding barriers to the customer journey and achieve equality as a disabled consumer

2. Introduction

Background

The development of the National Disability Strategy found that more evidence is needed about disabled people’s access to, and experience of, physical and digital products and services. As a first step, the Disability Unit (DU) commissioned the Research Institute for Disabled Consumers (RiDC) to develop research to better understand the barriers experienced by disabled people in different sectors and at different stages of the customer journey. 

A survey was designed by RiDC, working with an advisory group of 12 ‘experts by experience’. This group helped shape the research and interpret survey results. Two focus groups were also conducted.

The survey ran from 12 September to 19 October 2023. The survey was shared through RiDC’s network and through social media, and respondents to the survey were self-selecting. There were 1,545 valid and fully completed responses. Data was also collected on impairment type and other demographic characteristics. See appendix 1 for the profile of respondents.

Aims and objectives

The main aims of the research were to:

• explore the accessibility of sectors for disabled people and how these sectors were used   
• understand the barriers disabled people face at each stage of the customer journey
• explore what could help improve disabled people’s experiences in accessing private sector products and services

Methods 

The research started with a rapid evidence review of existing research. This was used to design a survey which was further developed by the ‘experts by experience’ group. Two focus groups were also held with respondents from the survey, representing people with a range of impairments. Focus groups explored participants’ views on what changes could be made in policy and or practice to overcome barriers within various sectors.

Survey

The survey was assessed and pre-tested to ensure accessibility. Adjustments included keeping the average response time below 25 minutes (a limit of 30 questions), avoiding inaccessible formats such as matrix questions, and allowing participation by phone. 

Analysis

Throughout the report some variables have been combined to assist the analysis: 

• income – based on household income, we have grouped respondents into 2 categories: low income (less than £16,000 per year) and not low income (£16,000 or more per year)
• age – this category has been grouped into working age adults (18 to 65 years old) and state pension age (over 65 years old)
• impairment – impairment categories have been grouped by physical, sensory, cognitive or mental health and other, in line with the Government Statistical Service (GSS) Impairment Harmonised Standard

Percentages in data tables may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Research limitations

This research was designed to gather insight from a wide range of disabled people to improve understanding around the accessibility of private sector products and services, while ensuring the research process was accessible for those taking part. There are a number of limitations to the research design that are important to consider when interpreting these findings.

Self-selecting data

This survey was self-selecting. This means that it was open to any person who wished to respond. As such, the conclusions represent the views and experiences of the respondents and may not represent the disabled population as a whole. However, this is still an important source of data on the accessibility of products and services, especially given the lack of other data sources on this topic.

Impairment data capture

Impairment data was collected using Government Statistical Service harmonised standards. This has the advantage of using a standardised and tested question. However, not all disabled people will identify themselves this way (for example, d/Deaf or blind rather than hearing or sight impaired), so it may limit understanding of these groups.

Sector focus

Certain sectors such as transport or private health care, medication or aid were excluded from the study, due to complicating factors (for example, a high level of overlap between public and private sector products or services) or a large amount of existing research. The identification of priority sectors may have looked different had the omitted sectors been included. 

Subsector focus

Respondents were asked to select up to 3 sectors in which they had experienced the most barriers. They then answered more in-depth questions on each of the sectors they had selected. This structure was chosen to keep the survey an accessible length. However, selecting 3 sectors may have limited respondents’ ability to express the true scale of the challenges they experienced, or caused them to focus primarily on the sectors they used the most frequently.

Considerations for further research 

Possible further research could be undertaken to gain more in-depth understanding of specific groups or sectors: 

• research into the experiences of people with specific impairments to understand specific needs and experiences in more detail – this could involve understanding needs of those registered blind or deaf or those using a range of assistive or mobility aids)
• research into the experiences of people with other protected characteristics, such as people from different ethnic groups 
• in-depth research on specific sectors to gain a more detailed understanding of  sector-specific challenges

3. Private sector accessibility 

“[Inaccessibility] makes everything that much harder to do. I have an energy-limiting condition and I need to save my energy as much as possible and not waste it on overcoming barriers that shouldn’t be there in the first place.”

Respondent with mobility, mental health and stamina impairments on the impact of inaccessibility.

Overview 

This section takes a high-level look at how respondents access the private sectors included in this research and the barriers they may face. It explores how various sectors can be inaccessible for different reasons and impact different demographics. In interpreting these insights, it is important to note that the data cannot always show the nuance of accessibility for specific groups or how frequency of use can impact sector barriers.

More detailed insight into experiences and barriers in each sector can be found in the section on Inaccessibility by sector.

Inaccessibility of sectors 

Respondents were asked to select all sectors in which they had experienced barriers in the previous 12 months when attempting to access products and services. The 3 sectors in which the highest proportion of respondents reported experiencing barriers were: 

• retail (65%)
• entertainment and hospitality (57%)
• wellbeing, personal care or beauty sector (49%)

Figure 3.1: Access barriers by sector

See Table 1 in the appendix for the full data.

Inaccessibility of subsectors 

For each of the (up to 3) sectors they had selected as the least accessible, respondents were then asked in which (single) subsector they experienced the most barriers or accessibility issues when trying to buy or use products or services. For each sector, the least accessible subsectors were as follows:

• wellbeing: hairdressers, barbers and beauticians (35%)
• finance and legal: banking products and services (56%)
• retail: groceries and grocery shopping (37%)
• technology: phone, computer or tablet hardware or software (41%)
• sport and exercise: gyms and leisure centres (65%)
• entertainment and hospitality: restaurants, cafes and food establishments (24%)
• household goods and services: white goods and kitchen appliances (23%)
• couriers and delivery services: online shopping delivery services (29%)

See Table 2 in the appendix for data on all subsectors.

Inaccessibility of sectors by demographics

There was some variation in inaccessibility for different subgroups of respondents:  

• in the sports and exercise sector, as income levels increased a higher percentage of respondents faced barriers
• a higher percentage of women experienced barriers compared with men across all sectors, with exception of the financial and legal sector – the gap was widest for the wellbeing, personal care and beauty sector
• a higher percentage of working age respondents experienced barriers compared with state pension age respondents across all sectors with the exception of entertainment, leisure and hospitality and household goods and services

Figure 3.2: Experience of barriers by income level

Figure 3.3: Experience of barriers by gender

Figure 3.4: Experience of barriers by age group

See the appendix (Tables 3 to 5) for further information.

Accessibility by impairment 

In all impairment groups, retail was the sector with the highest proportion of respondents reporting access barriers. The percentage ranged from 61% of those with a hearing impairment to 80% of those with a dexterity impairment.

People with a social impairment were most likely to report experiencing barriers in the financial (45%) and sport (53%) sectors.

People with a learning impairment were most likely to report experiencing barriers in the wellbeing (62%) and household goods and services (50%) sectors.

In the technology sector, the highest percentage of respondents experiencing a barrier were those with a vision impairment (47%), while in the entertainment sector it was respondents with a dexterity impairment (68%).

See Table 6 in the appendix for the full data.

4. Customer journey stages and barriers

“It seems like everything takes longer and is harder to do and that disabled people’s needs are often overlooked and that you need to always try and be with a non disabled person when possible to just make life that bit easier! I have to take a chance and buy things that I may not be sure about because the Retailer is busy or the item lacks enough details … And then have the issue of returning anything that does not suit, as I have to ask a friend for a lift or get a taxi to do so.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity, memory and stamina impairments on the impact of inaccessibility 

Overview

Respondents experienced barriers and accessibility issues  at each stage of the customer journey and overcoming these barriers came at a cost to respondents in terms of money, energy, time and social interaction. The customer journey stage that appeared most problematic to respondents was using or accessing the product or service, while the sector that was most challenging across the whole customer journey for respondents was the technology sector. 

For the least accessible subsector in the (up to 3) sectors that they selected as the least accessible, respondents were asked about specific stages of the customer journey where they experienced the most significant barriers. The stages were: 

• searching for and researching the products or services
• finding accessibility information on a specific product or service
• travelling to and from buying or using the product or service
• buying the product or service
• using or accessing the product or service
• dealing with customer services post purchase
• returning faulty or badly advertised products
• other (please specify)

Results are aggregated and reported at the sector level in the commentary below.

Customer journey stages

In all but one sector, the stage at which respondents most commonly reported barriers was ‘using or accessing the product or service’. The exception was the retail sector, in which respondents most frequently reported barriers at the ‘buying the product or service’ stage. The proportion of respondents experiencing barriers at the ‘using or accessing’ stage varied from 36% of those responding on the courier and delivery services subsector to 71% of those responding on the sport and exercise sector.

In all but 2 sectors, the stage where the smallest percentage of respondents encountered barriers was ‘returning faulty or badly advertised products’. Around 3% of respondents who had experienced barriers in the entertainment and hospitality, and sport and exercise sectors identified this stage as where they encountered barriers. This increased to 20% for those respondents who experienced barriers in the technology sector.

In the retail sector, the stage of the customer journey where the lowest percentage of respondents encountered barriers was dealing with customer services post-purchase (14%). In the couriers and delivery services sector, the stage with the fewest reported barriers was searching for and researching the products or services (16%).

The technology sector was the most consistently challenging at all stages of the customer journey. Over one-third (36%) of respondents who experienced barriers in this sector encountered them at the very first stage: searching for and researching the products or services. This rose to 50% of respondents at the next stage: finding information on a specific product or service that meets my needs. Half of respondents also encountered barriers when using or accessing the product or service.

See Table 7 in the appendix for the full data.

“I have researched accommodation (holiday lets) via booking platforms and chosen ones saying they are wheelchair accessible, only to find that in the majority of cases there have been major access problems, (…) many times I have had to come away early, as it is too tiring to manage the barriers.”

Respondent with mobility impairment.

“I can only walk short distances. My bank has closed all the branches apart from the High Street one. Most of the closed branches I could park near [or] adjacent to. The remaining branch I can’t park near to, so it is inaccessible to me.”

Respondent with mobility and stamina impairments.

Barriers

For each of the (up to 3) subsectors that they identified as least accessible, respondents were asked to select the particular barriers or accessibility issues that they experienced. They could select as many as applied.

In 5 out of 8 sectors, the most common barrier was the inaccessibility of the building, space or environment. This varied from 39% of those responding on the financial and legal sector to 80% of those responding on the entertainment and hospitality sector.

For the technology sector, the most common barrier was businesses offering information or communication in formats that were not accessible (42%). For the household goods and services sector it was additional costs (42%) and for the couriers and delivery services sector it was business having inaccessible policies or ways of working (36%). 

For 5 out of 8 sectors, the barrier that was least commonly reported by respondents was inaccessible online services or technology equipment. This barrier was reported by 7% of respondents in the wellbeing sector, rising to 19% for the household goods and services sector. For the finance and legal and couriers sector, the least commonly reported barrier was that the design of the product itself was not accessible or lacked accessibility features (and 21% and 17% respectively). For the technology sector it was that the building, space or environment was inaccessible (15%). 

See Table 8 in the appendix for the full data.

Mode of access

Respondents were also asked about their mode of access to the (up to 3) subsectors that they identified as least accessible to them. For 5 sectors, the most common mode of access was in person. This ranged from 55% of people responding for the household products and services sector to 88% of people responding for the sport and exercise sector. Online was the most common mode of access for the technology (53%), finance and legal (62%) and couriers (71%) sectors.

Figure 4.1: Mode of access by sector

See Table 9 in the appendix for the full data. 

5. Inaccessibility by sector

“I can’t go out alone. The shops, cafés [and so on] aren’t accessible, and even if they were, the pavements aren’t. They aren’t wide enough for a wheelchair (…) if there even is a pavement. I go out with my family, but not often. Everything else is done online, which can be expensive. It’s also time consuming and wears me down.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity and stamina impairments on the impact of inaccessibility.

This section explores each sector in more detail by looking at the experiences of barriers in subsectors, the frequency of accessing services and experiences of barriers by demographics. Key themes are also discussed from qualitative data which offer an additional perspective into the challenges respondents faced in the least accessible subsectors. Subsectors with less than 20 responses are excluded from analysis.

Retail 

Inaccessibility of subsectors

Respondents who selected retail as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors were then asked in which retail subsectors they had experienced barriers when buying or using products or services. They could select as many as apply. The 3 most inaccessible retail subsectors were:

• clothing and shoes (78%)
• groceries (76%) 
• convenience stores (60%)

Figure 5.1: Percentage of respondents who experienced barriers when buying or using products and services (retail subsectors)

Note: Respondents were those who selected retail as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors. N=654. Respondents could choose more than one subsector.

See Table 10 in the appendix for the full data and list of subsectors.

Specific barriers

Respondents who selected retail as one of their 3 most inaccessible sectors were asked an open question on the specific barriers they have experienced. The most frequently mentioned barriers were inaccessible store layouts, a lack of store assistance and social barriers. 

Respondents discussed how stores, shelving, checkouts and facilities were not designed for disabled consumers, as well as there being insufficient support options due to a lack of staff presence or availability to assist. Due to challenges accessing retail subsectors, some respondents reported an impact on their self-esteem due to a loss of independence and having to rely on others more. Many respondents were disheartened as they resorted to using deliveries instead and staying at home. Some went further to express their frustrations as they had to compromise with online shopping, and faced online accessibility challenges and extra costs.

“Accessing the facility, opening a door and then getting over the threshold is the first issue and then getting around a small store is the second issue. I now go with someone to the store and wait outside as it’s easier for me physically just not mentally.”

Respondent with vision, mobility and dexterity impairments.

“Self-esteem and not being able to wear clothes I like but having to make do with what I can get to fit me and disguise my scars [and] dressings [and so on]. With easy-to-use fastenings [and so on]. With shoes I struggle to try on shoes with my orthotics and sales staff don’t help as much as they used to so my carers again have to help. I’m so ashamed and hate what I wear.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity, mental health and stamina impairments.

Entertainment and hospitality 

Inaccessibility of subsectors

Respondents who selected entertainment and hospitality as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors were then asked in which entertainment and hospitality  subsectors they experienced barriers when buying or using products or services. They could select as many as apply. The 3 most inaccessible entertainment and hospitality subsectors were: 

• restaurants, cafes and food establishments (73%)
• cinemas, concerts, theatres and performances (68%)
• UK holiday accommodation (58%)

Figure 5.2: Percentage of respondents who experienced barriers when buying or using products and services (entertainment and hospitality subsectors)

Note: Respondents were those who selected entertainment and hospitality as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors. N=564. Respondents could choose more than one subsector.

See Table 11 in the appendix for the full data and list of subsectors.

Specific barriers

Respondents who selected entertainment and hospitality as one of their 3 most inaccessible sectors were asked an open question on the specific barriers they have experienced. Respondents described inaccessible buildings, facilities, and social spaces. This included physically inaccessible public spaces and a lack of assistive technology at music events and theatres. Some respondents also called for more quiet places in crowded areas, particularly at performances. 

In terms of the impact of these barriers, some respondents shared that they gave up attending entertainment or hospitality venues altogether. 

“More variety in table height and sizes and more information on the restaurant websites so that a larger table can be booked if required for a wheelchair user to enable more manoeuvre space for the wheelchair user and other people in the restaurant.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity, memory, stamina impairments.

“I no longer attend festivals and stay home while all my friends go without me.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity, memory, mental health, stamina and social impairments.

Wellbeing, personal care and beauty 

Inaccessibility of subsectors

Respondents who selected wellbeing, personal care and beauty as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors were then asked in which wellbeing subsector they experienced barriers when buying or using products or services. They could select as many as apply. The 3 most inaccessible wellbeing subsectors were:

• hairdressers, barbers and beauticians (68%)
• dental care (53%)
• eye care (39%)

Figure 5.3: Percentage of respondents who experienced barriers when buying or using products and services (wellbeing subsectors)

Note: Respondents were those who selected wellbeing as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors. N=407. Respondents could choose more than one subsector.

See Table 12 in the appendix for the full data and list of subsectors.

Specific barriers

Respondents who selected wellbeing, personal care and beauty as one of their 3 most inaccessible sectors were asked an open question on the specific barriers they have experienced. The most common barriers were the inaccessibility of hairdressers, dentists and opticians and being faced with additional costs. Some respondents suggested disability aware timeslots or spaces that were quieter or free from the use of chemical products. Others asked for more accessible sink designs (hairdressers) or practitioners taking off masks when communicating (dentists or beauticians).

In terms of the negative impact of inaccessible wellbeing services respondent noted:

• staying at home more and missing appointments 
• experiencing less choice, reduced lower self-esteem and confidence 
• having reduced or no access to services such as dentists, pharmacies and hairdressers 

“Embarrassment in having to ask for help negotiating the steps in the local store. It seemed to be a big task to assist and I was made to feel like I was making a fuss. I swapped opticians which meant I had to travel to the outskirts of the nearest city (…) which was also much more expensive.”

Respondent with hearing, mobility, dexterity, mental health and stamina impairments.

“I could not get my hair washed (and therefore not coloured) because the washbasins are only accessible via a high step. The sink chairs are fixed to the sink making it impossible for a wheelchair bound person to use them.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity, learning, memory, mental health and stamina impairments.

Household goods and services 

Inaccessibility of subsectors

Respondents who selected household goods and services as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors were then asked in which subsectors they had experienced barriers when buying or using products or services. They could select as many as apply. The 3 most inaccessible subsectors were:

• white goods and kitchen appliances (53%)
• repair and maintenance providers (41%)
• home improvement and DIY (37%) and energy utilities (37%)

Figure 5.4: Percentage of respondents who experienced barriers when buying or using products and services (household goods and services subsectors)

Note: Respondents were those who selected household goods and services as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors. N=187. Respondents could choose more than one subsector.

See Table 13 in the appendix for the full data and list of subsectors.

Specific barriers

Regarding the accessibility of household goods and services, respondents primarily experienced barriers with the design of the goods themselves and the ability to find and book reliable tradespeople. This included:

• finding trustworthy tradespeople was particularly important to respondents who felt more at risk of exploitation when inviting strangers into their home
• the time and energy that went into arranging home visits could be taxing or difficult, especially when a service would not arrive when promised – others noted they incurred higher costs for needing services due to their impairment (such as gardening, cleaning and DIY)
• respondents valued easy and transparent booking processes and more accessible product designs

“Nearly all products are now operated through touch screens with no audio feedback. Under the old methods I could do workarounds with bump ons or stickers to guide me. This is impossible with touch screens that are both hard to locate, and can easily result in incorrect commands….”

Respondent with vision impairment.

Couriers and delivery services 

Inaccessibility of subsectors

Respondents who selected couriers and delivery services as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors were then asked in which courier and delivery subsectors they had experienced barriers when buying or using products or services. They could select as many as apply. The 3 most inaccessible subsectors were:

• online shopping delivery services (58%)
• sending and returning parcel services (48%)
• grocery delivery services (33%)

Figure 5.5: Percentage of respondents who experienced barriers when buying or using products and services (courier and delivery subsectors)

Note: Respondents were those who selected courier and delivery services as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors. N=231. Respondents could choose more than one subsector.

See Table 14 in the appendix for the full data and list of subsectors.

Specific barriers

Respondents who selected couriers and delivery services as one of their 3 most inaccessible sectors were asked an open question on the specific barriers they have experienced. Respondents reported that they experienced barriers due to inaccessible business designs and working methods. For instance, drivers not allowing sufficient time, leaving parcels in inaccessible places or being faced with negative attitudes or a lack of disability awareness from staff. 

Some respondents also expressed feeling more at risk because of access barriers. For example, stolen deliveries or the process of negotiating access negatively impacted their health despite asking for support or providing clear instructions. 

“Leaving items on a reachable place (not dumped on the floor) allowing me time to get to the door to receive items, following instructions to make these accessible to me. Combining them all… I’m pleading for delivery please make it accessible for me.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity, learning, mental health, stamina and social impairments.

Sports and exercise sector 

Inaccessibility of subsectors

Respondents who selected sports and exercise as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors were then asked in which sport and exercise subsectors they had experienced barriers when buying or using products or services. They could select as many as apply. The 3 most inaccessible subsectors were: 

• gyms and leisure centres (85%)
• exercise classes (48%)
• team sports (29%)

Figure 5.6: Percentage of respondents who experienced barriers when buying or using products and services (sports and exercise subsectors)

Note: Respondents were those who selected sports and exercise as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors. N=255. Respondents could choose more than one subsector.

See Table 15 in the appendix for the full data and list of subsectors.

Specific barriers

Respondents who selected sports and exercises as one of their 3 most inaccessible sectors were asked an open question on the specific barriers they have experienced. Responses describe various challenges across the customer journey, including searching, gaining access, purchasing and using services. In terms of the impact of inaccessibility, some respondents stated they were unable to take part in this sector due to barriers, consequently impacting their physical and mental health.

“I have not been able to find a single pool that is accessible to me, despite trying about 10 places! The biggest problem is design: buildings are big, with disabled parking too far from reception and changing rooms … Sessions with easy-access steps (as opposed to ladders) are limited. Sessions for disabled people ([for example] aqua med, chair-based yoga [and] Pilates) are daytime only, so not good for working people like me…”

Respondent with mobility impairments.

“I don’t go anymore, that’s the biggest consequence, since losing my legs and my worsening mental health I have not managed to get back in the pool or gym due to not being able to access information about the gym and pool or hydrotherapy pool availability. Or about how changing would work and how I get from the changing rooms to the poolside … there’s no one you can ask who knows how any of this works”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity, mental health and social or behavioural impairments.

Financial and legal sector

Inaccessibility of subsectors

Respondents who selected financial and legal as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors were then asked in which financial and legal subsectors they had experienced barriers when buying or using products or services. They could select as many as applied. The 3 most inaccessible subsectors were:

• banking (74%)
• insurance (33%)
• lawyers, solicitors and legal advice (29%)

Figure 5.7: Percentage of respondents who experienced barriers when buying or using products and services (financial and legal subsectors)

Note: Respondents were those who selected financial and legal as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors. N=249. Respondents could choose more than one subsector.

See Table 16 in the appendix for the full data and list of subsectors.

Specific barriers

Respondents who selected financial and legal as one of their 3 most inaccessible sectors were asked an open question on the specific barriers they have experienced in this sector. Respondents described difficulties such as accessible information, physically accessing banks (due to bank closures or inaccessible designs), and getting support from staff who understand their needs. 

In terms of the impact of inaccessible financial and legal services, some respondents stated that they had increased worry and anxiety about finances, had incurred additional costs or felt at risk of abuse or scams.

“Lack of understanding from insurance companies of my family members’ disabilities, despite claiming they do publicly. Their product template, whether online or in person, is not set up for people with physical or mental disability.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity, learning, memory, mental health, stamina and social or behavioural impairments.

Technology 

Inaccessibility of subsectors

Respondents who selected technology as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors were then asked in which technology subsectors they had experienced barriers when buying or using products or services. They could select as many as applied. The 3 most inaccessible technology subsectors for this group were:

• phone, computer or tablet hardware or software (71%)
• internet and broadband hardware or software (56%)
• TV hardware or software (45%)

Figure 5.8: Percentage of respondents who experienced barriers when buying or using products and services (technology subsectors)

Note: Respondents were those who selected technology as one of their top 3 most inaccessible sectors. N=162. Respondents could choose more than one subsector.

See Table 17 in the appendix for the full data and list of subsectors.

Specific barriers

Respondents who selected technology as one of their 3 most inaccessible sectors were asked an open question on the specific barriers they had experienced.

Barriers included: 

• keeping up with the latest models and features, with some struggling with the move to touch screens as they were deemed less accessible
• integration and support for assistive technology like screen readers and hearing aids
• those with dexterity or vision impairments asked for lightweight devices with larger buttons and better grip

Some respondents stated smart devices and new innovations could make their life easier but could be more difficult to understand and set up and learn, for example when they required Wifi.

“Phones have increased in physical size as well as weight and are becoming increasingly difficult to hold, to use, without pain. This being said, on the other hand the accessibility features themselves for certain phones have advanced well, and while they’re still behind on what they could be offering, there is a lot more available in terms of visual, audio and other sensory impairments that even I find useful to use.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity, learning, mental health, stamina and social or behavioural impairments.

“Due to dexterity problems smaller phones and computers [are difficult because] buttons are so close together and [I] often hit more than one at a time. They are not designed with disability in mind but often as an afterthought and then are not fit for purpose [and] it costs a fortune to find out they are not good for you”

Respondent with vision, mobility and dexterity impairments. 

6. Impact

“I feel guilty if I go out to the nearest city, just browsing shops or attractions, with friends and family, because I’m constantly ‘cramping their style’ as there are countless businesses that are inaccessible, or only partially accessible (more stock upstairs!), and therefore I have to cut my visit short and they feel obliged to do so too.”

Respondent with mobility, learning, mental health and social or behavioural impairments on the impact of inaccessibility.

Overview

This section explores the impact of challenges experienced with private sector products and services across the different sectors. For the least accessible subsector in the (up to 3) sectors that they selected as the least accessible, respondents were asked if they agreed or disagreed with a series of statements about the impact of access barriers.

Results are aggregated and reported at the sector level in the commentary below.

The cost of inaccessibility  

Results indicated that, while the majority of respondents in each sector reported an impact on their behaviour, wellbeing and financial cost, some sectors were more affected than others. 

Having to apply workarounds or compromises and spending additional time gaining access or using services or products was common across all sectors. 

While a majority of respondents in each sector reported doubts that the access barriers they experienced would be addressed, respondents reported the least level of confidence in couriers and delivery or postal services sector.

Impact by sector

Workarounds or compromises

The majority respondents in each sector reported having to make workarounds or compromises.

The sectors in which the highest proportion of respondents agreed^{[footnote 1]} that they had to use workaround or compromises were: 

• retail (88%)
• entertainment and hospitality (87%)
• household goods and services and couriers and delivery services (83%)

Figure 6.1: Percentage of respondents who had to use compromises or workarounds due to inaccessibility, by sector

Note: Respondents were asked if they agreed or disagreed that they have to make workarounds or compromises due to inaccessibility. ‘Strongly disagree’ and ‘Somewhat disagree’ are combined into ‘Disagree’. ‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Somewhat agree’ are combined into ‘Agree’.

See Table 18 in the appendix for the full data.

Impact on consumer behaviour 

The majority of respondents in each sector reported an impact on their behaviour. 

The sectors in which respondents most commonly had to change their behaviour due to access barriers were:

• entertainment and hospitality (77%)
• sport and exercise (76%)
• retail and couriers and deliveries (72%)

Figure 6.2: Percentage of respondents who had to make changes to their behaviour due to inaccessibility, by sector

Note: Respondents were asked if they agreed or disagreed that they have had to make changes to their behaviour due to inaccessibility. ‘Strongly disagree’ and ‘Somewhat disagree’ are combined into ‘Disagree’. ‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Somewhat agree’ are combined into ‘Agree’.

See Table 19 in the appendix for the full data.

Impact on time 

Across all sectors, the majority of respondents reported spending more time accessing products or services due to barriers. The sectors where respondents most commonly reported impact on time were: 

• household goods and services (88%)
• technology (86%)
• retail (85%)

Figure 6.3: Percentage of respondents who had to spend more time than they would otherwise have done due to inaccessibility, by sector

Note: Respondents were asked if they agreed or disagreed that they have had to spend more time than they otherwise would have done due to inaccessibility. ‘Strongly disagree’ and ‘Somewhat disagree’ are combined into ‘Disagree’. ‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Somewhat agree’ are combined into ‘Agree’.

See Table 20 in the appendix for the full data.

Impact on physical or mental wellbeing

Across all sectors, the majority of respondents reported a negative impact on their physical or mental wellbeing as a result of access barriers. The sectors with the most reports of negative impact on their wellbeing were: 

• sports and exercise (86%)
• entertainment and hospitality (83%)
• household goods and services (78%)

Figure 6.4: Percentage of respondents who reported a negative impact on their physical or mental wellbeing as a result of access barriers, by sector

Note: Respondents were asked if they agreed or disagreed that inaccessibility has had a negative impact on their physical or mental wellbeing. ‘Strongly disagree’ and ‘Somewhat disagree’ are combined into ‘Disagree’. ‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Somewhat agree’ are combined into ‘Agree’.

See Table 21 in the appendix for the full data.

Impact on cost

Across all sectors, the majority of respondents reported products and services costing them more money as a result of access barriers.  The sectors in which respondents most commonly reported this impact were:

• household goods and services (73%) 
• retail (62%) 
• finance and legal services (60%)

There is some insight into these figures when referring to open text responses with respondents discussing extra costs for household products due to accessible devices being more expensive and having to spend more on household services.

Figure 6.5: Percentage of respondents who had to spend more money than they would otherwise have done due to inaccessibility, by sector

Note: Respondents were asked if they agreed or disagreed that that they have had to spend more money than they otherwise would have done due to inaccessibility. ‘Strongly disagree’ and ‘Somewhat disagree’ are combined into ‘Disagree’. ‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Somewhat agree’ are combined into ‘Agree’.

See Table 22 in the appendix for the full data.

Overall impact by demographics 

Respondents were asked about the overall impact of inaccessible products and services on their day-to-day life. Almost half (49%) of respondents said that it had a major or severe impact. An additional 37% said it had a moderate impact.

The following section looks at this question for key demographic groups.

Income

Impact was highest among those on lower incomes, with 57% reporting major or severe impact compared to 40% of high-income respondents.

Figure 6.6: Impact by income bracket

See Table 23 in the appendix for the full data.

Impairment type

The majority of respondents in each impairment group reported a high impact . This proportion was highest among respondents with a learning impairment (62%) and lowest among respondents with a hearing impairment (49%).

Between 1% and 3% of respondents in each impairment group reported no impact, with the exception of  respondents with a hearing impairment where the proportion was 5%.

Figure 6.7: Impairment by impairment type

See Table 24 in the appendix for the full data.

Age

More than half of respondents aged 18 to 65 years reported a high impact (52%), compared to 41% of those aged 66 and above.

Figure 6.8: Impact by age group

See Table 25 in the appendix for the full data.

Gender

Women were more likely to experience a high impact than men (52% compared to 42%). A higher proportion of men reported no impact (5%) than women (2%).

Figure 6.9: Impact by gender

See Table 26 in the appendix for the full data.

Area

Half of those living in urban and suburban areas reported the highest impact (50%), compared to 46% of those living in rural areas.

Figure 6.10: Impact by area type

See Table 27 in the appendix for the full data.

Digital confidence

People with low digital confidence were more likely to report a high impact (59%) than respondents with high digital confidence (48%).

Figure 6.11: Impact by digital confidence

See Table 28 in the appendix for the full data.

Confidence in the future

Respondents were asked how confident they felt that they would be able to find accessible products and services that meet their needs in the 12 months following the survey. Respondents were asked this question for the most inaccessible subsector in each of the (up to 3) sectors that they identified as least accessible. Results have been aggregated and reported at the sector level in the commentary below. 

Across all sectors, the majority expressed respondents reported low confidence.^{[footnote 2]} The sectors in which participants expressed the lowest confidence were: 

• sports and exercise (71%) 
• retail (64%)
• entertainment and hospitality (63%)

The sectors in which participants expressed the highest confidence in were:

• technology (24%)
• wellbeing (21%)
• household goods and services (19%)

Figure 6.12: Confidence in improved accessibility in the 12 months following the survey

See Table 29 in the appendix for the full data.

7. Recommendations to improve accessibility in the private sector

Respondents were asked to share the single biggest change which would make a difference to their day-to-day life. They were asked this question for each of the most inaccessible subsectors in the (up to 3). In the commentary below these have been combined into overarching themes, along with insights from focus groups.

Main recommendations 

There were 4 main themes in open-text responses across all sectors: 

• co-production – encourage or enforce co-design and co-production of products and services
• build accessible environments – enforcing minimum access requirements for physical spaces as well as digital spaces and tools
• accessibility for all – enable accessible and affordable services and products, assessing a range of requirements within and across impairment groups
• improve attitudes and staff training – enforce disability awareness training

Respondents were then asked a closed question on the single most important thing the government could do to make products and services more accessible. The top 3 options chosen were:

• make accessibility standards mandatory rather than voluntary (40%)
• develop inclusive design principles that ensure new products and services are accessible to disabled people (16%)
• create more in-depth or detailed accessibility legislation which can be enforced (12%), and enforce stronger sanctions for sectors not providing accessible products and services (12%)

Participant reflections on government intervention

Many respondents wanted the government to enforce ‘reasonable adjustments’, as opposed to just encouraging them. There was a particular focus on addressing structural barriers such as the built environment and digital accessibility. Some respondents also highlighted social barriers that added challenges in the customer journey, such as a lack of in-person support and negative attitudes from staff and the public. To tackle some of these issues, some responses discussed embedding co-production and accessible design.

Built environment - physical and digital

In terms of physical access, the most commonly discussed problems were:

• quantity and quality of disabled parking, for instance some disabled parking was insufficient due to long distance from shops or inadequate pavements. 
• buildings and store layouts, such as step-free access throughout, sufficient facilities and accessible evacuation procedures
• products and services with inclusive designs, such as more adjustments to exercise equipment

Some participants said that sometimes  a service may advertise itself as accessible but not meet a variety of accessibility requirements or does not have the same choice or quality of outcome for disabled customers as for non-disabled customers. For example, unsuitable seating for wheelchair users in venues, or accessible exercise class taking place only during working hours.

Some respondents expressed the importance of legal intervention to enforce accessibility standards for all services so that disabled consumers can have equal access. Some of these responses also raised standardisation of the online space and services such as booking systems – for example, as attempted with web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) – in ways that can be reinforced. Additionally, government enforcement was emphasised rather than putting the onus on the person.

Accessible forms of communication and the option for direct support through customer service were regarded by some respondents as important for removing barriers. Having non-automated channels for support was considered important as ‘bot’ channels were not always accessible and alternative options were either hard to find or not available. In focus groups, some went further and suggested dedicated support channels for disabled consumers. This was also emphasised for services such as banking, which have moved primarily online.

“Changes to the Equality Act 2010 that would obligate all businesses to ensure they provide step free access.”

Respondent with mobility, dexterity and stamina impairments.

“Some sort of standard that means that there are specific requirements about data and accessing the information in an accessible way for screen readers and keyboard navigation”

Respondent with vision, mobility, dexterity and stamina impairments.

Accessibility for all

While physical access was an important theme, some respondents also noted that full accessibility for all disabled people would also require accessibility standards to include not only different or multiple impairment access needs but also accessibility of a range of assistive aids. Some of these respondents also suggested capping additional charges for accessible services to remove financial barriers and ensure services remain local. 

“More regulation on what accessible features are mandated in hotels and other accommodation. This needs to consider the needs of those with more complex disabilities…I would also like to see a cap of how much the cost can be raised for the provision of such items”

Respondent with mobility, learning, mental health and stamina impairments.

Attitudes and training 

Some respondents felt that the government should do more to enforce disability awareness training among staff and private companies. Some respondents advocated for disability training that was tailored to sectors, such as how to speak to disabled customers and listen to what support they ask for. Inclusive training for sports facilities and staff was also suggested, such as trained staff to assist in using accessible equipment and accessible options during exercise classes. This would enable more disabled consumers to participate safely and feel included. 

“I do feel you could have 99 visits that go well, but as soon as you have one where you are freezing cold… or you have a bad experience, because a member of staff is like, well, can’t you do it yourself? It’s all of that.”

Focus group participant with mobility impairment.

Co-production and accessible designs 

Some respondents asked for the government to encourage or mandate the involvement of disabled people in design processes, or suggested using co-production and co-design principles as well as audits to test services and products. 

“Stop making accessibility a special case or an exception: build it in by design to all systems and processes. Make a law stating that all businesses have to consult with disabled people on their operations”.

Respondent with mobility, stamina and other impairments.

Suggestions for further research

Some research participants reported that they perceived changes in society to often occur at a much faster pace than policies and interventions designed to prevent a negative impact on disabled consumers. Being mindful of these concerns, and based on the outcome of this research, RiDC recommends future research on identifying practical solutions and actionable policy change.

1. Responses were: Strongly disagree, Somewhat disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, Somewhat agree, Strongly agree. ‘Agree’ combines the Somewhat agree and Strongly agree responses. ↩

2. Response options were: Very doubtful, Somewhat doubtful, Neither confident nor doubtful, Somewhat confident, Very confident. ‘High confidence’ combines Somewhat confident and Very confident responses. ‘Low confidence’ combines Somewhat doubtful and Very doubtful. ↩