× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Decision making and appeals  →  Thread

Telephone appeal hearings

HarlowAC
forum member

Harlow Advice Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 184

Joined: 1 March 2019

Hi All

I have a couple of clients who do not feel able to take part in a telephone hearing and would prefer to wait for face to face hearings to re-start.. Both their hearings were postponed on this basis. We have now had directions notices saying that the hearings must go ahead either as telephone or video hearings.
Has anyone else come across this?

BC Welfare Rights
forum member

The Brunswick Centre, Kirklees & Calderdale

Send message

Total Posts: 1366

Joined: 22 July 2013

I have had a couple of requests for postponement refused in similar circumstances. As it looks like we are going to be stuck with telephone hearings for the next 6 months at least, I think that Tribunals are going to be very reluctant to postpone hearings for some indefinite point in the future when face to face hearings return.

wbamic
forum member

Mind in Croydon

Send message

Total Posts: 53

Joined: 19 June 2019

I did manage to attend a face to face hearing in a couple of weeks ago now.  The client had some evidence of a hearing impairment so this may have been to justification for an in person appeal.  The security guard told me that they has 3 in person hearings expected that week.  I think in normal times they would have around 20 or so a day.  Be interesting to see if a back log is developing or if lapsed appeals and decisions being made by a judge performing a triage of the papers are keeping the numbers at a reasonable level?

Va1der
forum member

Welfare Rights Officer with SWAMP Glasgow

Send message

Total Posts: 706

Joined: 7 May 2019

There’s clearly a difference between ‘preference’ and ‘need’, the latter being much more likely to cause an unfair hearing. There are definitely some cases where you could evidence that a phone hearing would be unfair. Deafness, for instance. Hypersensitivity to Electromagnetic Radiation (EHS)? - possibly if the judge has been watching Better call Saul.
If your client’s issues are such that the tribunal would be likely to have to adjourn on the day, you’d have to make that argument to the tribunal now.

The counterriding objective, as BC pointed out, is that we might be stuck with phone hearings for a long time, so it might be counterproductive to postpone - potentially for a long time.

DWRS
forum member

Durham County Council Welfare Rights

Send message

Total Posts: 73

Joined: 21 June 2010

In Durham, we’ve been told that the appellant will have to provide medical evidence as to why a telephone hearing is unsuitable, or they will have no choice but to attend.

NAI
forum member

Unclaimed Benefits Campaign, Middlesbrough CAB

Send message

Total Posts: 131

Joined: 12 January 2015

DWRS - 07 October 2020 03:36 PM

In Durham, we’ve been told that the appellant will have to provide medical evidence as to why a telephone hearing is unsuitable, or they will have no choice but to attend.

How about my telephone is not working properly and I can’t afford a new one?

Mike Hughes
forum member

Senior welfare rights officer - Salford City Council Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 3138

Joined: 17 June 2010

I prefer to not classify need by medical condition as I think that gets you into generalisations that aren’t really sustainable and if the last 6 months have taught us anything it’s surely that the number of people for whom a face to face service is the only solution is far fewer than one might have anticipated. Some tabsom thoughts:

1 - in 6 months of duty cases I’ve come across 1 case where I can see absolutely no alternative to face to face contact.

2 - if your telephone is not working and you can’t afford a new one then
- there are several charities who will fund one.
- I’ve had 1 client use a PC at a local library.

3 - I’ve had a recent client with a massive and overwhelming social phobia of telephony. Only communicated with me by email. Did a 20 mile round trip to do their PIP conversion call and managed to get them on the phone momentarily to give consent. It’s amazing what can be overcome when someone sits in front of you and hands you the phone. Had we pursued anything to a phone hearing I’d have got them to their child’s home; sat 2m+ away or even outside and made it happen.

R - a preference for a face to face hearing is often based on false assumptions about the advantages. Most of us will have seen at least some advantages for telephone hearings. Lay out the realities and most clients will go for the phone hearing.

Helen Rogers
forum member

Welfare rights officer - Stockport MBC

Send message

Total Posts: 233

Joined: 17 June 2010

Mike - I think you need to be very careful if you’re trying to suggest that people with mental health conditions can do things really that they claim not to be able to.  Of course someone will do something when forced to because they have been given no alternative.  Many people with mental health conditions are not very good at asserting themselves.  But what you won’t witness is the trauma and distress caused, which might not manifest itself until a long time later.  When we say someone with a mental health condition can’t do something, we don’t mean they physically can’t do it.  We mean the distress caused would make it unreasonable to force them to do so.

MM1239
forum member

Advisory Team, Money Matters, Glasgow

Send message

Total Posts: 15

Joined: 20 September 2018

Glasgow is providing video equipment at the venue - claimant and rep attend, same room at a distance and the clerk sets up video link to the tribunal.  all covid rules observed. It is preferred by a minority of appellants - on the one hand, clt and rep have to go to the venue, on the other, they are in the room with the rep….