I recently requested a copy of the statement of reasons for a client in a sensitive case I represented. The chairperson refused on ground that client did not provide written authorisation for me to do so. I thought I read somewhere that a commissioner ruled that when client indicates on GL24 form that they wish a person to represent them this can count as implied written consent for purposes such as requesting written statements. Was the Chairperson correct to deny my request?

Commissioner Williams in CDLA/652/2004 held that Regulation 33(1) of the Social Security and Child Support (Decision & Appeals) Regulations 1999 provides that an appeal to an appeal Tribunal may be made either by a person with a right of appeal or 'where the person … has provided written authority for a representative to act on his behalf, by that representative'.

He also highlights Regulation 49(8), which separately allows anyone to be represented at a tribunal and gives the representative 'all the rights and powers to which the person whom he represents is entitled'.

In addition he considers that that Question 5 on the TAS1 form - 'if you already have a representative, please give their name and full address' - should also be regarded as covering a request for a statement of reasons under Regulation 53.

A summary of CDLA/652/2004, together with a link to the full decision itsef, is avaliable in the briefcase area of rightsnet.

Thanx a million Ken. I knew I read that somewhere. I really appreciate your help.

In my experience there has been a problem in requesting statements of reasons as the authority to act for the client has been considered to have ended with the tribunal hearing. As a result it is usuallly best to request the statement of reasons on the day, or have a 'fresh' form of authority ready. Another possibility is to have an open ended form of authority, some chairman have suggested wording along the lines of an 'abiding form of authority to act'. I've also known fellow reps to get a problem where this has been taken to be a 'appointee' arrangement with subsequent order books/giro's for benefits being issued to the rep as the appointee.

Just to let you know Ken - the legally qualified member returned my request for statement of reasons along with a form for me to request a statement of reasons outside the time limit, since any subsequent request will now be late. I have returned the form indicating I wish to challenge the LQMs decision based on the developments in Commissioners Case No.: CDLA 652 2004. The circumstances of my case are very similar. I represented my client at the hearing. My client indicated in the Appeals Service preliminary enquiry form that I would represent him at the hearing. My client did not indicate that I was acting under any sort of limited authority. The preliminary enquiry form should suffice as authority for me to obtain a statement of reasons.

I'll keep you all informed of the developments in this case.

Just to let you know that the legally qualified member has told the Appeals Service in Northern Ireland that he has looked at CDLA 652 2004 and that he thinks I'm correct regarding the representative's right to request a statement of reasons. Before he makes a final decision he is consulting with the President of the Appeals Service in Northern Ireland to make sure. He said he was never alerted to the existence of CDLA 652 2004 before. This is good news for representatives in Northern Ireland.