I had cause to lodge a formal complaint against a tribunal chair a number of years back, due to inappropriate comments that he made during a DLA appeal ("Why should we give this man anymore money? We might as well go and throw the money down a hole in the road" being one of the offending remarks). Publicly, it seemed to achieve very little in that the response I recieved from the District Chair stated that the chair in question denied making any such remarks, always trys to act sympathetically towards appellants, etc etc.
I became extremely worried about what would now happen if I came before the offending chair again but he seemed to disappear from the tribunal listings and the next thing i heard was that he had been retired. So maybe privately, more action took place than would, or could, be acknowledged publicly. I've heard from a source subsequently that complaints are taken seriously by TAS and can help to confirm suspicions of inappropriate or improper behaviour by tribunal members, even though again in public, they would be reluctant to air those difficulties.
I think you need to carefully unpick the reasons why you disagree with any decision the tribunal have made and your reasons for challenging that, and the reasons why you are unhappy with the conduct of the chair. Of course there may be some overlay between the two but if you make a complaint about the chair, you should try to ensure that it is not percieved in any way to be simply sour grapes at what you think is the wrong decision being made.
For example, if the chair has breached some aspect of the legislation by making a medical diagnosis in the way that you describe it, this can form part of a challenge to the Commissioners. Whereas some of the rudeness that you describe and attacking you for failing to provide services for a client when that is not your responsibility could be the subject of a complaint about the conduct of the chair.
Good luck in whatever course of action you decide to take.
|