Disappearing appeals

This is the third time this has happened in one of my cases.

We submitted the appeal 21/8, no acknowledgment nor any emails about progress.

HMCTS cannot find the appeal. However if I try to submit another appeal we get a message back that we’ve already appealed.

Is there anything I can do on this end to fix it?

Two pieces of data have gotten disconnected. Save someone tech savvy on their end going into their system and puzzling out the missing pieces, it won’t be fixable.

You might be able to find a common denominator in your 3 cases. Use of special characters in any of the text you’ve submitted, for example. Might be able to prevent it happening, or the issue might be entirely on their end.

I think you’ll just have to submit a new appeal on paper or email.

This has happened to me 3 times recently, on each occasion they were late appeals, when the DWP did not dispute lateness, we then received the standard acknowledgements. Not helpful.

I had this - not an ideal solution but I moved the date of the MRN by one day in order for it to be submitted, but was clear in my spiel about when the actual decision date was. I think the date of the MRN is the identifier that they use to see whether you’ve submitted before.

We have had a couple. One PIP (we chased up and eventually found) and one UC WCA (as above nothing then just as we were going to chase up - papers arrived).

is it something that might feed into this - https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/19593/

Reading this I am further encouraged by my allegedly sad entrenchment in the idea that I will not submit appeals other than by paper SSCS1 because the digital system remains unfit for purpose. I have a bit of Canute about me in this respect.

Coincidentally I completed my AJC response and may have suggested exactly the former point at great length and with a certain force.

I am an avid user of technology and very digitally literate and comfortable but it’s supposed to make things better. Where it doesn’t I think it’s important to not just accept bugs and glitches but to say that it’s not fit for purpose. When it comes to the organisation who went live with it they are not a listening and engaging organisation. They remain, in the words of Buddy Holly, an “I’m gonna tell you how it’s gonna be” organisation. The persistence of such issues and the approach of the implementing organisation are not disconnected.

I note that in the time it’s been live I’ve neither had nor heard of one client who said “... but surely there must be a way I could do this digitally.”

I think a core part of the issue here is that people weren’t getting the automated confirmation from HMCTS. I always ensure that I receive it, and if I don’t it’s flagged immediately for action.
With that safeguard I haven’t had any issues using the online portal.

It usually arrives before I’ve finished writing the casenotes, and it even comes with the appeal reference number! As far as online offerings from DWP, HMRC and HMCTS go, I actually think it’s one of the better ones.

Worst case scenario I get an automated confirmation, but HMCTS manages to lose it somehow anyway. In that case I’ve got confirmation the appeal was validly lodged and grounds for an OOT appeal.

I don’t wish to contribute much more here lest we go way OT and distract from the original issue raised. I will observe that, for me, the issue is not whether it works for me as an adviser but more how it plays out for clients.

In practice, clients getting gnomic notifications which don’t actually say what has happened just results in them contacting me to ask what it means or me contacting them to explain that nothing of significance has happened despite the notification and, no, there is nothing for us to do etc. In systems theory it’s epic failure demand. Work created out of nothing for people other than HMCTS because their system doesn’t function as it ought. Logging in because my client wants me to login as they’ve received a notification when I already know that it’s just going to tell me my sub has been added, which I knew anyway, is a waste of time and energy for all concerned.

There is also a level of anxiety created by these things for clients with LD, MH and more which would absolutely be avoidable if the thing were well designed. I’ve had clients in despair after they’ve contacted me a fourth or fifth time about a fourth or fifth notification which was absolutely irrelevant/meaningless in the context of the case.

Mike Hughes - 13 September 2023 11:35 AM

In practice, clients getting gnomic notifications which don’t actually say what has happened just results in them contacting me to ask what it means or me contacting them to explain that nothing of significance has happened despite the notification and, no, there is nothing for us to do etc. In systems theory it’s epic failure demand. Work created out of nothing for people other than HMCTS because their system doesn’t function as it ought. Logging in because my client wants me to login as they’ve received a notification when I already know that it’s just going to tell me my sub has been added, which I knew anyway, is a waste of time and energy for all concerned.

There is also a level of anxiety created by these things for clients with LD, MH and more which would absolutely be avoidable if the thing were well designed. I’ve had clients in despair after they’ve contacted me a fourth or fifth time about a fourth or fifth notification which was absolutely irrelevant/meaningless in the context of the case.

I deal with this problem by always advising clients not to opt for notifications. I advise them that notifications will always come to me and I’ll let them know if anything of importance is notified. I’ve yet to have a client who doesn’t take that option.

I’ve had multiple instances now where I have advised clients exactly that and their notifications come regardless. That aside I have no time and zero tolerance for filtering HMCTS notifications to decide what is relevant. Not my job. A total failure of system design caused ultimately by a refusal to engage with users.

Interestingly I have a potential GDPR storm brewing.  I lodge stuff by paper SSCS1 and don’t include my email address. Mysteriously I have some cases where my email address suddenly gets attached to a case and notifications start arriving. Funny that.

You’re going to have a damn hard time convincing me any part of digital appeals are fit for purpose. Don’t even start me on page numbering or EA 10 issues.