|
The following is similar to a reply I posted to an earlier thread. I would however like to make it available to a wider audience and appreciate feedback and suggestions as to what else I can do.
In February 2005 I represented a client in relation to a DLA appeal regarding a renewal claim where no award was made. The decision of the tribunal was to ratify the DM'a decision. I requested a Statement of Reasons and that arrived at the end of April 2005.
In that Statement of Reasons the Chair explained that part of the reason for not making an award was because:
1) I was representing the client in the appeal
2) I was dishonest and coached my clients to tell lies
3) The Chair had allegedly been informed at an earlier appeal by a client that I had encouraged an exaggeration of the truth
The Chair then went on to describe how the lay members were told of the alleged experience.
When I received the Statement I was in complete shock and can honestly state that even now there is not a day that passes that I do not think about this. Needless to say that I deny the totally the accusations levied against me.
A complaint was made both by myself and through my employer to the Regional Chair who quoted the Protocol back (after we had found them ourselves) stating that he could do nothing until the matter had been heard by Commissioners. Copies of letters were also sent to the President of TAS in London.
The Chair was asked about the case that it was alleged that I had encouraged a client to lie in (and indeed for a copy of Statement that it was indicated that had been drafted on that occassion) but no details were provided except the belief that it was heard about '18 months ago'.
The same Chair also refused leave to appeal to Commissioners!!
In the meantime my employer conducted a detailed check of my cases, as the thought was that the matter should be treated as a complaint, and they were all found to be absolutely fine.
Eventually the Commissioner concerned directed a re-hearing at which benefit was awarded.
When the Regional Chair was then asked to investigate the case fully, along with: a) the possible impact it may have had to previous cases in the intervening period b) what had been said to the lay members (and indeed other Appeals Service personnel) c) the impact on my and my employers future cases .... he refused to do so!!
An unconvincing unreserved apology was sent by the Regional Chair but he refused any further action. This means that to date I do not know what impact my name is having in relation to appeals I am assiting with, what other Chairs know of the situation and whether previous cases have been prejudiced!!
The President was again asked to intervene but has continually refused, stating that the Regional Chair has dealt with the matter appropriately.
We are now well over a year on and the matter is now before the Office of Judicial Complaints (had thought Parliamentary Ombudsman, and we are awaiting their response.
I am still extremely hurt about what has happened and the refusal from the Appeals Service to investigate a serious complaint that has a such impact on my cases and future.
From reading previous postings it seems that the Appeals Service is quick enough to threaten defamation against those who dare make comment about them but who themselves know that they are immune to action due to 'judicial privelege'.
The bottom line is that Appeal Chairs do not seem to have open accountability for their actions and the checks that are in place to deal with problems just allow for an attempt to brush things under the carpet.
My local MP has now received a second complaint about Chair conduct and is now looking to take action about the situation. If anybody wants further information or has had similar problems then then please reply to this post. I can then possibly make the MP aware of a greater situation.
|
