Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
To appeal you can fill in the form in leaflet GL24…
Ah that old chestnut from HMCTS!
Aside from the DWP using an ‘old stock’ letter that refers to a GL24 and (therefore presumably) is not headed ‘mandatory reconsideration notice’ there is no such thing as a ‘mandatory reconsideration notice’ in the primary legislation. It just makes life easier for all concerned if a decision notice is headed ‘MRN’.
Correctly titled it is a decision following an application for revision before appeal [SSA s9, SS&CS;(DA)Reg. 3ZA] although Tribunal Rule 22(4)(a)(i) does refer to ‘notice of the result of mandatory reconsideration’. There is no statutory requirement for a decision notice issued following application for revision before appeal to be titled ‘MRN’. So the Rule refers to something that does not exist / required as such within the social security legislation! So the decision notice sent with the SSCS1 clearly complied with Rule 22 in practice.
However - as clerks at HMCTS who consider whether an appeal is valid look for something clearly headed ‘MRN’ anything that does not conform is often rejected with out the application of the skills of reading or common sense!
in practice it saves a lot of grief and delay if you enclose a covering letter with the SSCS1 explaining why the enclosure should be accepted as an MRN even thought it does not say so in big letters at the top! (or why an MRN has not been enclosed and why it should still be accepted as a valid appeal).
to be fair to HMCTS if it is returend with a covering letter explaining why it conforms to Rule 22 these days they do seem to then accept it as vaild (rather than delay it further by referring it to a judge to determine the beeping obvious).
It is also worth making a complaint to HMCTS where an appeal is rejected simply because the notice enclosed does not say MRN in big letters and the clerk has clearly failed to actually read it (don’t mince your words!) and the unneccessary delay and cost to the pubic purse incured as a result.
It is also worth making a complaint to HMCTS where an appeal is rejected simply because the notice enclosed does not say MRN in big letters and the clerk has clearly failed to actually read it (don’t mince your words!) and the unneccessary delay and cost to the pubic purse incured as a result.
I made a complaint some time ago when they failed to deal with an application for Directions which was very clearly headed as such. The excuse that HMCTS offered was that the clerks never read any of the letters sent to them because they don’t have time!
It is also worth making a complaint to HMCTS where an appeal is rejected simply because the notice enclosed does not say MRN in big letters and the clerk has clearly failed to actually read it (don’t mince your words!) and the unneccessary delay and cost to the pubic purse incured as a result.
I made a complaint some time ago when they failed to deal with an application for Directions which was very clearly headed as such. The excuse that HMCTS offered was that the clerks never read any of the letters sent to them because they don’t have time!
Hi Neil
We make complaints about such things on a weekly basis! HMCTS’s service (Birmingham ASC) is now awful - possibly worse than DWP or even HMRC? The old Tribunal Service used to be an example of good public service (when the DWP was already in a downward spiral etc etc.). Ah the good old days!!
Billy
I would also suggest making a complaint to DWP about using an out of date letter explaining the problem it has caused with HMCTS.