Hi,

Fresh from a TUG meeting to discuss the Social Entitlement Chapter first tier tribunal rules coming in on 3/11/08. I'm a little dismayed by s.11(5) which (in the current draft) permits the Tribunals Service to send documents to the representative where one has been appointed instead of the appellant and not as well as.

I attended an earlier TUG where this was the subject of a lot of criticism and (perhaps naively!) I thought later drafts of the new rules might change. But at today's meeting it seemed to be presented as unavoidable or at best "we'll just see what happens".

Now wondering if there's anything more I can do, other than write to my MP who must be fed up of hearing from me.

Sue

Hi Sue

We have the same concerns. One way round this is not to be listed as the rep until the TAS 1 is returned. I know this has its ups and downs but at least the Department and TAS will communicate with the client with documents etc. and not depend on reps as their admin staff.

The only problem with sending documents to client only, you will have to rely on client contacting you when papers received. This could be a real problem with clients with learning disabilities or mental health issues. At present we pick them up as both parties receive the Submission and we often have to chase these clients to sort out the TAS 1, if papers sent direct to appellent we will be out of loop if client then doesn't contact us. Maybe there is a DDA action to be had as the only justification for the Reg. has to be cost cutting.

Yes, I can't imagine working on the assumption that clients bring everything to us so I think we will have to swallow the costs. There was a definite air of "let them eat cake" at the TUG meeting I attended ... it was opined that organisations with a CLS contract had money for this type of thing. Well, that's a theory if you are that type of organisation (we are, but I must say I haven't noticed a stamp and envelope mountain surrounded by clumps of bored admins hanging around with nothing to do. At least not recently.) Organisations who are not CLS-related, I don't know where they're supposed to find the moolah.