Worrying Court underfunding report

I have just read a report in the Times which makes it clear that the current problems in the courts due to underfunding are only going to get worse.

The report states that Judges are having to sit longer hours and for more days, and that a recruitment ban on all but the most exceptional posts is being imposed. This at a time when claims to the courts are only going to go up.

We lawyers have repeatedly said that there is not much point in having legal rights if it is impossible to enforce them. The Times reports states

Sir Mark Potter, Britain’s most senior family judge, called for urgent action to tackle growing delays in child abuse cases, exacerbated by a surge in work after the Baby Peter case. He warned that judges and court officials face the “formidable problem” of accommodating the extra work in an “already strained system”.

The report also points out that criminals are opting to plead not guilty as they know that by the time the case comes to trial the event will be such a long time ago that witnesses will have forgotten all about it, and they are more likley to get off.

This is all very, very worrying.

Although I did suggest a couple of years ago various ways the courts could try to raise a bit more cash. This might be the time to consider this sort of thing.

Time taken to get possession of a property through the courts – an example

One of my clients has a non paying tenant living in a property in the jurisdiction of the Luton County Court. Proceedings were issued on 19 March and an order for possession was obtained on mandatory grounds on 11 May, when the tenant was ordered to vacate on or before 25 May. She did not do so and I was instructed to apply for a bailiffs appointment. The papers were sent out on 29 May.

Today my client asked me to find out what was happening. It took some time before the bailiffs clerk answered the telephone. She informed me that all warrants are now issued in Basildon, so are sent there on receipt at Luton. Our warrant had been issued yesterday, on 10 June. When they get a batch back at Luton they will then fix the bailiffs appointments. They are currently listing for about 8 July, so my client can expect (if he is lucky) an appointment within about two weeks of that date.

So my client having issued proceedings in mid March will not get possession of his property until mid to late July, four months later.

Landlords should be aware that this is the sort of time delay you can expect when issuing proceedings for possession. My client was lucky in that the court made a 14 day order rather than a six week order (which can happen – if it had happened in this case the tenant would have been ordered to leave on or before 22 June). They should also be aware that it can take up to two months for a bailiffs appointment to be fixed in some courts, so it really is important to get on with things, and not delay.

Solicitor sues the court!

There is an interesting news article in the Law Society Gazette today about a solicitor who is so fed up by the appalling service provided by the Central London County court (CLCC) that he is bringing a claim in the High Court! The claim is for a judicial review to force the CLCC to list a landlord and tenant claim for hearing. The writ claims that "neither letters to the court, nor telephone calls, nor even a letter written under the Judicial Review pre-action protocol copied to the Official Solicitor .. have produced any action."

Of course if you know the court system, you will know that sending a letter is often worse than useless. As things are dealt with in strict rotation, you will receive a reply to your letter of complaint, several weeks after the original problem has been resolved, telling you that it has been resolved (which of course you already knew!). The only way to find anything out is to ring the court, where normally (and invariably for the London Courts) you will have to wait in a queue for hours. Most solicitors do not have time for this.

In the Gazette article, the courts service is quoted as saying that the number of complaints to the courts are down. The reason for this is probably that most people, in the legal profession anyway, have given up complaining as they know it will be no use.

The real reason for all the problems in the courts is of course chronic underfunding. Some courts, I understand, cannot afford to use Deputy District Judges at all, which is why cases are taking so long to be dealt with. They cannot afford to pay good wages to their staff, which is why all the good staff are leaving or have left, and those who take their place are mostly unqualified and untrained. Dealing with the listing of cases is a nightmare anyway, what with having to deal with witness availability on both sides, and it becomes impossible where there are not enough Judges to hear the claims. I feel very sorry for County Court managers and am devoutly glad that it is not me having to do it!

Incidentally, I did give some suggestions for county court fundraising in an earlier post.

More problems at the county court

I have written in the past about problems with the courts. That was about a court order having the wrong court details. In the past few weeks I have had, not only a further instance of the court / order mixup, but two very serious errors in the text of orders sent out to me.

One, which was an order relating to an Employment Tribunal award, actually gave us, the solicitors, as the defendants and not the real defendants! God knows what training the clerk who did it was given. To do them justice the court amended it pretty swiftly once we had pointed out the error (I wrote them a stern letter). Hopefully it will not affect our credit rating.

The other mistake was saying in an order for possession that the order was made under discretionary grounds when it had actually been made under mandatory grounds. A copy of Counsels’ endorsed backsheet soon sorted that out, but it just goes to show that you have to be really careful.

County court possession order error

I had a very odd court order come though the post today. It was in respect of a hearing two days ago (which surprised me to start with!). It had the correct heading, but then said that the hearing took place in on 15 June in the Clerkenwell and Shoreditch County Court, whereas in fact it was in Norwich County Court on 25 June. It said that the defendant did not attend when he did, although they got his name right. They got the name of the Judge wrong though, and the judgement sum was incorrect, etc, etc.

It looks as if two separate cases have got confused. Perhaps there is a Clerkenwell case where the parties are going to receive an order with my case details in it! So much for the new central system.

The moral of the story – always check your court orders!

Where has all the money gone?

I see from the Law Society Gazette this week (p5) that the County Courts made a profit of £45.5 million pounds last year. So why, when I was speaking to the manager of our local court last night, did she tell me that they have a massive turnover of staff because they cannot afford to pay them properly, and that they have horrendous listing problems because they cannot afford to use enough Deputy District Judges? Where is all this money going to?

By the way, turn over to page 21 of the Gazette and you will see a bit about me!!!

Financing the courts

I was talking to someone who knows the other day, who told me that many courts are experiencing horrendous financial problems. Their funding is insufficient and they are having to make more and more cuts, which are affecting the services that they provide. For example badly paid staff, with no proper training resulting in a high staff turnover, not enough money to employ sufficient deputy district judges which means huge back logs with box work and delayed court hearings. All very bad news.

Well one answer is perhaps for the courts to become a bit more commercial and start earning some extra income. Here are a few suggestions:

A monthly newsletter. I have always thought that this would be a good idea – it could have announcements about court services, new initiatives etc, letters from readers, articles by Judges about procedures not being followed properly, Q&A sections, information about new court rules and procedures and the like. Virtually all solicitors firms and barristers chambers would no doubt subscribe. If the court charged £250 pa and got 200 subscriptions that would be £50,000 per year. It could be either paper or electronic.

Guided tours around the courts. Sounds awful but if stately homes can make money at it, why not the courts? The guide could give information about the judicial and court system, plus some juicy stories about famous trials which had taken place and the like.

A business centre, e.g. for solicitors and lawyers. For example wi fi cards for laptops, a photocopying service, hire of computers with internet access, hire of standard legal books such as the green book by the day or half day, and fax facilities.

A bookshop selling legal books, both for the general public (for example the LawPack range) and text and other books for solicitors and barristers. Plus some bodice rippers for bored advocates to read in the advocates room if they have to wait a long time for hearings to come on and don’t have any work to do or colleagues to talk to! It could also usefully stock counsels notebooks and pens.

These are just a few ideas. I am sure there are many more. Courts could ask their staff to make suggestions, with a bonus paid for the best ideas. Staff could also give suggestions for savings as well – often quite junior members of staff can come up with brilliant ideas that no-one else has ever thought of.

So there you are. No doubt there are reasons why none of these can happen, but I am sure that if they made an effort and thought in a different and more entrepreneurial way, courts could do a lot to bring in some more cash. They are obviously not going to get it from the government.