× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Decision making and appeals  →  Thread

HMCTS to stop hearing most Social Security appeals?

 < 1 2

Mike Hughes
forum member

Senior welfare rights officer - Salford City Council Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 3138

Joined: 17 June 2010

Burning flesh I suspect…

Other issues recently come across (and discussed at last Fridays superb GMWRAG meeting in Stockport).

A strong suspicion that the decision explanation call either contains no reference to MR or appeal or it’s tacked on in a meaningless way. The mere existence of that call inevitably means a claimant is put off challenging. Why would you once a DM has comprehensively explained to you why they are right? It’s hardly going to inspire you to think you might change their mind. Already come across a case yesterday where the client very clear that the phone explanation included no reference to their MR or appeal rights!

The observation that the decision on the validity of appeals is now made in Bradford by a clerk and doesn’t appear to be being passed to a judge where there is a refusal to accept a valid appeal. This is a subtle but key change and we appear to have no information or data on it.

Finally, and a key one, access to the appeal form has now been locked down. A paper copy is not available in your local JC+ and isn’t included in with your 2 MR decisions. The letter makes reference to the right of appeal and links to the site where the form is found but we are reliably informed it does not provide a form number and nor does the link go to the actual location. Try finding it for yourself via a search through the site. Then imagine being a claimant or potential appellant!

The process of typing in a link from a document is never easy. It only really works when you link to a homepage but when your linking deeper into a site the amount of text is inhibiting and, let’s be honest, would we bother. So, “justice denied” in action. Appalling really. I’m all for getting decisions right first time but if you’re confident in that then allow the right of appeal to co-exist and administer it properly.

I have downloaded the appeal form and saved it. I make a point of gathering email addresses from clients now. At least I can then email the form to them.

As far as decreasing work for us is concerned I wholeheartedly agree. You wouldn’t want to be going through job evaluation right now…

[ Edited: 29 Apr 2014 at 10:04 am by Mike Hughes ]
Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Peter Turville - 23 April 2014 04:41 PM

Contacts at HMCTS say there are no changes afoot within Birmingham ASC region (e.g. training of court clerks for tribunal work or visa versa). Perhaps there are some initiatives in other regions where there are shared court and tribunal venues?

Sorry Peter I missed this; I know with some certainty that the clerks are being retasked in Birmingham; some of them are my friends… the quote was “not so much multifunctional as multijurisdictional” and I know of people transferred to High Court and County Court functions over the last few weeks.

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

I have it on very good authority that the refusal of domiciliary hearings is down to Elfin Safety requirements that dictate an assessment of an appellant’s home before granting a request.

How that weighs against the interests of Justice is something we will be considering very closely next week.

Mike Hughes
forum member

Senior welfare rights officer - Salford City Council Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 3138

Joined: 17 June 2010

DManville - 16 May 2014 09:40 AM

I have it on very good authority that the refusal of domiciliary hearings is down to Elfin Safety requirements that dictate an assessment of an appellant’s home before granting a request.

How that weighs against the interests of Justice is something we will be considering very closely next week.

I had heard this from a few sources but I have my suspicions it’s just another “something to put out there”. Have spoken to several judges about this and also the clients involved in my last domiciliary hearings and there’s clearly a discrepancy between what’s supposed to happen and what is happening. Hands up if you’ve ever had a client visited once by a clerk et al doing a H&S risk assessment! I suspect not.

Now, could it be, that with the dearth of tribunal hearings, these hearings suddenly fall to FT judges for the first time in many years and a percentage of them simply don’t want to do them. These are probably the judges who like to make an entrance; insist on being formally addressed; find a reason to lecture the rep. or appellant at least once during a hearing regardless of the level of actual behaviour, and, generally enjoy the status of “judge” to the detriment of actual justice.

Just a thought.

Or could it be, as I have previously surmised on an earlier related thread, that they have simply run out of dosh…

 

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Mike Hughes - 16 May 2014 10:36 AM

Or could it be, as I have previously surmised on an earlier related thread, that they have simply run out of dosh…

 

I’m swaying on this having discussed it with one of my favourite Judges recently. The live load is about 30% of what it was this time last year; intake’s down by a similar proportion.

It might just be a good time to restructure.

 

 

Mike Hughes
forum member

Senior welfare rights officer - Salford City Council Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 3138

Joined: 17 June 2010

Interesting discussion with a PO.

I point out that appeal forms are not widely available and the problem with the mere existence of DMs “explaining” decisions being an intimidatory thing. It is then revealed that their training included explicit instructions to not even mention the right to mandatory reconsideration. Not quite as it’s been presented (pardon the pun) then!

(Some) POs are uncomfortable with this and have found ways around it e.g. when asked if there’s anything else you can do they don’t mention MR but do perhaps mention a page number and a paragraph in certain correspondence the claimant has rec’d, which may just refer to MR.

This isn’t an attempt to “get it right first time”. It’s a devious, spiteful campaign of deliberately undermining the right to challenge a decision.

Ruth_T
forum member

Volunteer adviser - Corby Borough Welfare Rights & CAB

Send message

Total Posts: 313

Joined: 21 June 2010

An unexpected consequence of having Tribunal Service clerks replaced by Court staff is that, in cases when no written decision is issued at the hearing, (and this is becoming increasingly common due to the impossibility of dealing adequately with a LCW appeal in a 30-minute time slot) the Decision Notice arrives in an envelope marked “Town name Magistrates Court”.  This is not appropriate for our clients.

Mike Hughes
forum member

Senior welfare rights officer - Salford City Council Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 3138

Joined: 17 June 2010

Ruth_T - 26 July 2014 04:46 PM

An unexpected consequence of having Tribunal Service clerks replaced by Court staff is that, in cases when no written decision is issued at the hearing, (and this is becoming increasingly common due to the impossibility of dealing adequately with a LCW appeal in a 30-minute time slot) the Decision Notice arrives in an envelope marked “Town name Magistrates Court”.  This is not appropriate for our clients.

Eek!!!

I agree it’s not appropriate but I suppose now you know it’s happening you can at least give appellants a heads up that this is what will arrive. It’s not like they’re going to agree to use different envelopes.

Although there is undoubtedly pressure to get through more cases I do think the reason for less decisions on the day is simply that the court clerks

a) don’t do that. Historically they are used to typing up at leisure if at all.
b) have received somewhere between little and no training on using TS template decisions.

I now advise my appellants that when we arrive at the venue we look at where they are in the list and how long they’ve been listed for. From that I add 15 minutes to each hearing time before us and 15 minutes to ours. That gives us an idea of when we’ll be in; how long we’ll be in, and, enables me to calculate the increasingly low odds of a decision on the day.

I also think there’s an increasing disinclination to decisions on the day as there’s a genuine understanding of how distressing a no is for an appellant and a serious concern that one day someone will get hurt if they haven’t been already. It’s an explosion waiting to happen.

paulmoorhouse
forum member

Central and South Sussex CAB

Send message

Total Posts: 96

Joined: 25 January 2012

Today I saw a cilent (from Worthing) whose case had been referred by Bradford to the West Midlands TS regional office. When he queried why this was he was told that it was because of ‘a mix up over postcodes’—the only plausible mix up I can think of is that the Worthing BDC now has a Worlverhampton post code (along with almost every other DWP office in the country….) I hope this thinking doesn’t catch on.

Juancho
forum member

Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2

Joined: 28 August 2013

Eyup Dan, we’re getting through a hundred hearings a week here in Leicester as new venues have been opened, lots and lots of ESA and DLA to catch up on as there was a waiting list of over a year. I guess once these are heard there will be a drop off a cliff! Have you got any outrageous ESA sanctions up your way? I’m looking for some examples.

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Juancho - 01 August 2014 09:40 AM

Eyup Dan, we’re getting through a hundred hearings a week here in Leicester as new venues have been opened, lots and lots of ESA and DLA to catch up on as there was a waiting list of over a year. I guess once these are heard there will be a drop off a cliff! Have you got any outrageous ESA sanctions up your way? I’m looking for some examples.

Hi Juan

Sorry for the delay I’ve only just spotted this. drop me an email dan dot manville at wolverhampton.gov.uk for the sanction stuff…. quickly!

We’re down to one or two sessions a week over here; we have already hit that cliff edge so it would seem.