Is there a specific reason in the law to prohibit the use of email for communication purposes?

[ethan]

I'm representing a vulnerable person who is unable to communicate herself due to a disability in a dispute with a bank.
At the onset of the complaint, the bank provided an email for us to use to send all the particulars to do with the complaint including all of the necessary GDPR permissions. Since then the bank has sent out instructions to an agent (acting on their behalf), they are no longer to accept email as a means of communication because they no longer consider the transmission and receipt of their data to be safe. They are requesting everything to be sent by post or conveyed by phone.

I'm finding this suspicious as it didn't appear to be an issue, to begin with, and secondly presumably the same potential problems you can get with email, will also apply to the mail.

I have since found out that they have been forced to backtrack on comments they made by email and in my opinion are attempting to close this method of communication down to cut down on their mistakes.

Does anybody know if email communication- which is a preference expressed by the vulnerable adult being represented-is still a viable/legitimate route to take?

 

[dlockers]

Email is not considered a secure messaging service - especially where sensitive information is concerned. Ideally they'd have an online platform to communicate over.

 

[ethan]

I'm quite surprised by their response as the reason for communicating by email for me was to prevent them, the bank from sending letters directly to their client, who was borderline barely able to comprehend them/suicidal when she did.

I'm assuming disbility discrimination including FCA regulation with regards to acting with due diligence and sympathy could come into play here with the emphasis being on making reasonable adjustment to their working practices.

Saying that, all communication has since stopped so I can't understand why it's only just become an issue except for the fact they couldn't keep up with the exchanges- so much so they kept on requesting things that had already been received and contradicting their own advice when they did.

Other organisations haven't had the same issue.