Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
So, it looks like the Citizens Advice Bridport & District office - a legal entity - can sign on behalf of the client because we have the completed aut
As far as I understand it you can sign most documents on the client’s behalf - so long as you sign with your own/org’s name and make it clear you’re signing on their behalf (i.e. pp sign).
I wondered about this myself during the pandemic where I couldn’t see clients face to face, and I couldn’t find anything in law etc that stands in our way. As a matter of good practice I would make it clear to the client whenever I do this though.
As far as I understand it you can sign most documents on the client’s behalf - so long as you sign with your own/org’s name and make it clear you’re signing on their behalf (i.e. pp sign).
I wondered about this myself during the pandemic where I couldn’t see clients face to face, and I couldn’t find anything in law etc that stands in our way. As a matter of good practice I would make it clear to the client whenever I do this though.
Oooohh thanks Va1der, anyone else any thoughts?
Below is a link to the ICO take on this
When is consent invalid?
In summary, you do not have valid consent if any of the following apply:
you have any doubts over whether someone has consented;
the individual doesn’t realise they have consented;
you don’t have clear records to demonstrate they consented;
there was no genuine free choice over whether to opt in;
the individual would be penalised for refusing consent;
there is a clear imbalance of power between you and the individual;
consent was a precondition of a service, but the processing is not necessary for that service;
the consent was bundled up with other terms and conditions;
the consent request was vague or unclear;
you use pre-ticked opt-in boxes or other methods of default consent;
your organisation was not specifically named;
you did not tell people about their right to withdraw consent;
people cannot easily withdraw consent; or
your purposes or activities have evolved beyond the original consent.
The point is presumably just so that they know that the request is made with the claimant’s authority, as against being sent by someone uninvolved for reasons of their own. I don’t see there is much more to it than that. Whether you sign it yourself or have the client do so seems to me a matter of your own practice.
Your colleague asks why you might insist on the client signing it personally. I think its just a question of who is assuming responsibility for the document. If you are concerned that a document is particularly controversial or that the facts might have been misunderstood, it may be appropriate to have the client sign it personally so as to avoid any issue about it later being said that you went off on a frolic of your own.
I’m not sure that a client really is likely to ask why you are having them sign a document personally rather than doing it for them? But if asked, you would just say that it is important to ensure that they’ve checked over it all and confirm its correct.
I’ve been signing Mandatory Reconsideration requests and enclosing a signed mandate for the last couple of years with no issues.
TLDR: Imho, issues are unlikely to arise as long as you keep your client well informed and you have valid authority.
I don’t see that it has anything to do with GDPR - other than how you securely store the mandate and ensure the client is aware you have it and what it’s for.
I think it’s less an issue around the act of signing, and more the consequences of the agreement entered into, that you need to be aware of.
I.e. signatures can become an issue down the line if it transpires that you signed something that you either didn’t have a valid authorisation to sign or you (un)knowingly abused that authority.
Say, for example, you signed one of the statements where the client accepts the responsibility to report any relevant changes on a DWP claim form, but you failed to impress this on your client. They might then bring a claim against you for an overpayment that ensued because they failed to notify a change.
If the authority was invalid - you could, I suppose, potentially become liable yourself for the OP.
If it was valid, the client would have to claim against you directly for the moneys.
I don’t see that the implications of the signature on a CRMR1 are particularly onerous - I’d view it as at least implying that the client does indeed want to challenge the decision and is aware of the contents of the form.
One issue I can see arising is where the client hasn’t specifically approached you for help with an MR/appeal, say where you’d first helped them with the original claim, and you proceeded to the ‘natural’ next step to challenge a negative decision without properly consulting your client - MR comes back with a lower award, and client challenges you on this.
I would be careful about letting less experienced staff sign documents on clients’ behalf - they might not be as thorough in keeping the client well-informed and, equally importantly, might not record their interactions properly (for evidence you’d need if the client challenged you on something you signed).
Conversely, asking clients to sign documents themselves ensures that they are both informed and that this is recorded (explicitly, by their own signature on the document). That is why I would prefer to have them sign documents themselves, in most cases.
Thanks everyone!!!!