Hearings listed too close together

For the second time now in the last couple of months I’ve had two PIP hearings listed within 1 hour of each other.

The first time the later hearing was a remote hearing, so I couldn’t possibly get set up to attend it even if the first hearing had been over and done with in 30 mins. Resolved with the unnecessary delay of a postponement.

Now another one. Both in person this time, so could theoretically make it (but the first case is complex, so I definitely won’t).

On both occasions the hearing notices have been emailed to me. Notices for both appeals in the one email. I’m the named rep on all appeals. For most appeals I just get them by post.
On a good day one might think they’re trying to do me a favour by listing my appeals on the same day - but it just seems so glaringly obvious that the timings will cause a conflict.

(I’m increasingly vexed with tribunal practices lately, both admin/clerical and panels/judges - I know they’re overstretched like any other service, but it just seems to be getting worse)

EDIT: Meant to be a question in there: Is there some more practical way to deal with this, or should I just continue requesting postponements?
Suppose the tribunal could elect to wait for me, it might even be the same panel for both hearings (though I’m guessing not, since they are so close), but it does seem to raise the risk of an adjournment on the day, and the extra faff that causes.

You’re lucky to be getting email notifications of hearings! ;)

It’s been an issue for as long as I can remember. HMCTS has never had a system of recognising the hearing dates and times it has allocated to individual reps, or even individual organisations (unless it’s the DWP). And things have undoubtedly got worse with the reduction in staffing.

I have sometimes been able to persuade them to juggle hearing times in order to avoid postponement - e.g. to get two separate HB appeals or UC right to reside appeals listed for the same day to be heard consecutively by the same tribunal (one cannot then start until the other has finished) but generally you’re going to need to get a postponement.

In the second case, usually there is only going to be one panel hearing PIP cases on a given day except perhaps in the biggest venues, so is it not just that you’ve got two cases before the same panel?

Ideally if you have a contact for listings, you can sort this kind of thing out without the need to specifically request postponement formally.

I think in general the listing clerks are pretty busy and most reps don’t actually go to hearings these days as opposed to putting in written subs so I don’t think that the rep’s convenience is routinely considered in setting dates.

Nicely timed thread.

HMCTS listed one of mine for a morning and then changed their mind and listed it for a late in the week afternoon. They then issued a second hearing notification for a different case and listed that at exactly the same time as the one they’d moved. Both are telephone hearings so I guess I have some phone juggling to do 😊 One is listed for Bolton and one has no location attached at all. Comic genius.

I understand this has occurred because listings teams have collapsed absent sufficient clerks and so each venue has a listings clerk who will not see the lists for other venues. Thus it can only get worse. I will be emailing them imminently to advise that as I can’t do two at once they can decide which one they’re postponing as it’s not my role to referee between the needs of my appellants. Also very tedious as you have to dot the “i”‘s and cross the “t”‘s by explaining to a random duty judge that no your colleagues cannot simply step in. HMCTS lack of basic knowledge about how welfare rights services work continues to embarrass them at all levels. Perhaps if they “engaged”?

Particularly galling when HMCTS is busy emailing us all asking how they might improve their engagement. Having some; making it more frequent than the annual show trial ambience of TUGs and making it meaningful would be the gist of my response to this stuff. Add in their brilliant blogs telling the world what they can learn from their digital transformation (insert strong word of your own preference followed by “all”) and after thirty plus years it’s hard to conclude anything other than the DoJ are killing tribunals much as the NHS is being killed.

Ironically of course I almost could do two phone appeals at once. Time it right and my intro. for each could be staggered whilst my wrapping up only requires me to listen intently and make notes to two calls. Much like working in an office then. Matter of time before someone at HMCTS sadly tries to make exactly this argument.

On the bright side they emailed me back promptly today and confirmed the hearings are indeed by the same panel, so should go ahead consecutively even with delays.

Fortunately my less vulnerable client is the later hearing, so should be ok to wait around for an indeterminate amount of time.