Disclaimer: The following blog reflects my personal opinions and views on the subject discussed. It is based on my own experiences, perspectives, and interpretations.
This past week brought news that should have marked a fresh start for us. Riverclyde Homes informed us that we had been successful in bidding for a property in Greenock — something we had been hoping for as part of our effort to rebuild our lives. But instead of relief, we were met with an unreasonable and disheartening demand.
Despite knowing that we are both on a low income, autistic, and living with chronic anxiety, Riverclyde Homes insisted that we travel from Tewkesbury to Greenock — a journey of up to 15 hours one way by public transport — just to sign the tenancy agreement and verify our identities in person. For us, even a 45-minute local bus journey is often overwhelming. Expecting us to make such an extreme trip, only to return home and then repeat the journey by van to move our belongings 6.5 hours north, is simply not practical — or humane.
This demand ignored more accessible and affordable alternatives that would have allowed us to complete the necessary steps without this ordeal. Riverclyde Homes could have:
- Sent the tenancy agreement by post for us to sign and return via tracked mail;
- Provided a PDF version to print, sign, and send back;
- Utilised an electronic signing platform like DocuSign;
- Arranged for remote identity verification via video or online services — a common, secure practice used by many housing providers.
The insistence on a wet signature in 2025 — when countless secure and legally accepted digital alternatives are readily available — is absolutely ridiculous. It shows a lack of willingness to adapt to modern, inclusive methods that support tenants with accessibility needs. Many other organisations, including banks, housing associations, and government bodies, already accept electronic signatures as valid and binding. There is no excuse for refusing to accommodate us in this way.
What’s even more concerning is that Riverclyde Homes’ approach flies in the face of the Housing (Scotland) Act. There is no legal requirement under the Act for Scottish secure tenancy agreements to be witnessed or physically signed in person in order to be valid. The law allows for far more flexibility than what Riverclyde Homes is enforcing — yet they continue to impose arbitrary barriers that have no legal backing, particularly for vulnerable applicants.
Instead, we were left with a single, inaccessible option that shows a lack of understanding or care for the realities people like us face. This isn’t just about inconvenience — it’s about accessibility, dignity, and fairness.
We are not seeking special treatment. We are asking for the bare minimum of consideration for our disabilities and financial situation — a reasonable and inclusive process that doesn’t punish us for circumstances beyond our control.
We urge Riverclyde Homes and other housing providers to review their policies and procedures, and to begin embracing accessible, digital solutions that accommodate the needs of all tenants, especially those who are vulnerable.
This experience has reminded us that even in moments of hope, systemic barriers can make progress feel impossible. That needs to change.
#HousingCrisis #DisabilityRights #AccessibleHousing #AutismAwareness #MentalHealthMatters #SocialHousing #RiverclydeHomes #HousingInequality #RemoteAccessibility #FairHousingNow #HousingScotlandAct