The most common reasonable adjustment disputes
Ryan Hoare · Founder, TryMosaic · Last reviewed
This guide is part of our complete guide to reasonable adjustments tribunal cases.
Disputes are made early, not late
By the time an adjustments disagreement is formal, the positions have usually hardened around something that happened months earlier: a decision nobody explained, a promise nobody kept, or a silence that went on too long. The patterns below recur across sectors and organisation sizes. [TODO: verify] Frequency figures for each pattern will be added once our tribunal dataset is complete.
1. The unreasoned refusal
A request is declined with a sentence or less: not practical, not fair to the team, not something we do. Refusing an adjustment can be lawful when the request is not reasonable in the circumstances, but a refusal with no recorded reasoning gives the employee nothing to engage with and gives the employer nothing to point to later. The fix is procedural: no refusal leaves the process without a written reason and the alternatives considered.
2. The agreement that never happened
The meeting went well, everyone agreed, and then nothing arrived. The chair was never ordered, the software was never installed, the rota never changed. From the employee's side this is worse than a refusal, because it adds broken trust to the original disadvantage. The fix is ownership: every agreed adjustment has a named owner, a due date, and something that fires when the date passes.
3. The adjustment lost in a change
A new manager arrives, or the employee moves team, and adjustments that worked for years quietly stop. The employee faces a choice between re-disclosing everything to a stranger or absorbing the disadvantage in silence. The fix is continuity: the record follows the employee, surfacing to the incoming manager with the employee's consent, so support survives the org chart.
4. The delay that becomes a refusal
Nobody says no. The request is acknowledged, then referred, then awaiting a meeting, then awaiting advice, and months pass with the employee still working at a disadvantage. A long enough delay has the same effect as a refusal, whatever the intention. The fix is published timescales with a floor the organisation can actually meet, and escalation when they slip.
What the four have in common
None of these begins as a legal problem. Each begins as a gap in process: no requirement to record reasons, no owner for implementation, no continuity across changes, no clock on responses. That is worth taking seriously as good news, because process gaps are fixable in a way that attitudes and budgets sometimes are not.
This guide is general guidance, not legal advice. If you are dealing with a live dispute, take advice from an employment law specialist or ACAS.
If you are evaluating vendors, book a short TryMosaic demo and put the questions above to us first.
References
- Reasonable adjustments at work (ACAS)
- Equality Act 2010, section 20: duty to make adjustments (legislation.gov.uk)
- Employment tribunals (GOV.UK)
- Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)
Related guidance
Frequently asked questions
What adjustment disputes escalate most often?
Four patterns recur: refusals given without reasons, adjustments agreed but never implemented, adjustments lost when a manager or role changes, and delays long enough to function as refusal. Each starts as a process gap rather than a point of law.
Is refusing an adjustment automatically a dispute?
No. Refusals can be lawful where the request is not reasonable in the circumstances, and a refusal explained properly, with alternatives explored and reasons recorded, often ends the matter. It is the unexplained refusal that hardens into a dispute.
How long is too long to respond to an adjustment request?
There is no statutory deadline, but delay does not pause the employee's disadvantage, and a long enough delay has the practical effect of a refusal. Publish timescales you can meet reliably and escalate internally when they slip.
Why do adjustments disappear when managers change?
Because the knowledge lived in the relationship rather than in a record. Where the adjustment record follows the employee and surfaces to the incoming manager with consent, a manager change is an event in the process rather than the end of the support.
How do we stop these disputes before they start?
Close the four gaps: require recorded reasons for every refusal, give every agreed adjustment a named owner and a due date, make records follow the employee through changes, and put a clock on responses. A system that enforces these makes the failure modes hard to reach.
Published · Last updated · This guide will next be reviewed by .
TryMosaic is the system of record for workplace adjustments under the Equality Act 2010.