Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
PIP Appeal - Request for Audio
An update on my recent case. We applied for a set aside, one of the grounds being that it was not possible to deduce the reasoning from the SOR in the absence of the audio and the ROP. Fairly shortly afterwards I was emailed a copy of the audio as an attachment and asked if we wanted to continue with the set aside request.
I have been told (don’t know if it is true) that the reason people are having difficulties obtaining the audio recordings is nothing to do with technological problems and the like but is based on a concern that if they are sent out in large numbers people will start to publish them in the public domain.
I think HMCTS need to call their colleagues in Scotland who have been recording Tribunals for a number of years. A copy of the recording on a CD is sent with every statement of reasons. I’ve not heard of anyone placing these in the public domain or even that anyone up here thinks it is an issue
I don’t really see the problem. Technically, oral hearings of appeals are open to the public. It’s exceptionally rare for a member of the public to ask to attend a hearing, and in all my years of repping appeals it’s only happened once, when a law student asked to sit in. There have, however, been plenty of occasions when either I or the presenting officer has taken along a colleague in training.
An update on my recent case. We applied for a set aside, one of the grounds being that it was not possible to deduce the reasoning from the SOR in the absence of the audio and the ROP. Fairly shortly afterwards I was emailed a copy of the audio as an attachment and asked if we wanted to continue with the set aside request.
I have been told (don’t know if it is true) that the reason people are having difficulties obtaining the audio recordings is nothing to do with technological problems and the like but is based on a concern that if they are sent out in large numbers people will start to publish them in the public domain.
Thank you for your update. We’ve just been refused permission by the FTT whilst awaiting the audio - sent in our basic argument to cover 1 month limit as advised by court staff whilst waiting for audio.
Looking forward to writing to the UT directly
Thanks for the advice. We will do - I’ll mention what Mack67 has said as well.
I have been told (don’t know if it is true) that the reason people are having difficulties obtaining the audio recordings is nothing to do with technological problems and the like but is based on a concern that if they are sent out in large numbers people will start to publish them in the public domain.
Definitely a technological brain fart in the North West.
I think it helps being a rep with a reputation for pursuing them to UT. Have found several tribunals and individual panel members far more co-operative since the first national lock down, although the co-operation is easing back now.
I have received one of these EX107 this morning from Sutton for a Universal Credit appeal. Cover letter only states the following ‘Further to your request for a copy of the Record of Proceedings. Please can you complete and return the enclosed form EX107 so that your request can be processed’. I am minded to not engage with the form and to look to write back requesting the record again, outlining the the point raised in this thread.
[ Edited: 1 Mar 2021 at 01:14 pm by wbamic ]I have received one of these EX107 this morning from Sutton for a Universal Credit appeal. Cover letter only states the following ‘Further to your request for a copy of the Record of Proceedings. Please can you complete and return the enclosed form EX107 so that your request can be processed’. I am minded to not engage with the form and to look to write back requesting the record again, outlining the the point raised in this thread.
Since posting this message, we have had an update.
We didn’t send the EX107 form back at all but was still sent a transcript of the Record of Proceedings, so not sure if they’ve now been told that its the wrong procedure to follow.