Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
HMCTS ain’t what it used to be
Is it just me or are things going decidedly down hill?
Leaving aside a spate of subs/additional evidence apparently not being received/circulated despite being faxed and posted on more than one occasion, appeals being rejected on spurious grounds and not being listed as rep when I flipping well should be, I’ve now had a client have her hearing adjourned because the panel had been sent the wrong bundle. It was for someone else (opposite sex) with the same surname…
I know mistakes happen but I am miffed about it. The client concerned has been worrying about the hearing ever since the date was circulated and having to go through it all again is not hurrah.
Things really do seem to be going a bit pear-shaped don’t they?
I think these pretty much cover it.
http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/6241 and http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/6279/
No work so significant numbers of clerks will be going and may even be compulsory cos presumably their contracts not as tied in as judges. What’s left is inexperienced or tied to the Court Service and not competent in the jurisdiction. As someone said elsewhere re: legal aid. It’s all about knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing.
That said, TS have a long and glorious history of sending out papers to the wrong people; disclosing stuff that was not meant to be disclosed etc. The administrative side is rooted in a very 1940s/1950s view of the world and simply sees this stuff as a statistical inevitability given the volumes rather than a fundamental fault with the process or a breach in which the Information Commissioner would show a healthy interest.
The process breaks down each aspect of admin. so that different teams deal with different issues. The issues described can’t happen if you adopt a case management approach where one clerk takes a case from start to end. Systems theorists would have thought they’d have died and gone to heaven if they were let loose on TS.
Am I allowed to say (I’m going to say it anyway) that one of my favourite things in the whole world is the resigned roll of the eyes and slight twitch/nervous tic you get from FT judges at TUG meetings when admin. answer questions in a manner suggesting they enjoy the concept of the tail wagging the dog far too much and have lost touch with reality.
Ah - that would be the new Rules:
Delegation to staff
4.—(1) Staff appointed under section 40(1) of the 2007 Act (tribunal staff and services) may, with the approval of the Senior President of Tribunals, carry out functions of such a nature and/or manner that will frustrate and confound the appellant
Ah - that would be the new Rules:
Delegation to staff
4.—(1) Staff appointed under section 40(1) of the 2007 Act (tribunal staff and services) may, with the approval of the Senior President of Tribunals, carry out functions of such a nature and/or manner that will frustrate and confound the appellant
Not sure about the “new” element of that :)