Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when HM Courts and Tribunals Service started writing to disabled and unwell appellants to request that they complete and return a new enquiry form requiring confirmation that they wish to continue with their appeal for personal independence payments or employment and support allowance and who have already provided the required information in an SSCS1; and how many of those forms have been sent to date.
Answered by Rory Stewart
The Social Security and Child Benefit (SSCS) Direct Lodgement Centre (DLC), based in Bradford, has since April 2013 dealt with the receipt, compliance checking and case creation of all SSCS appeals for England and Wales. This includes appeals against decisions on all Department for Work and Pensions administered benefits, alongside the following from HMRC: Child Tax Credits, Working Tax Credits, and Child Benefit.
Following the launch and acceptance of a lodged appeal the DLC will forward to one of 7 Regional Centres for progression of the case. The prescribed form for a lodgment of an appeal is the SSCS1 form, and on receipt of a compliant appeal in this form the DLC would not issue a further hearing enquiry form. However to ensure access to justice, the DLC accepts appeals in any format, usually received in the form of a letter. This may not contain all the relevant information and in these circumstances a Hearing Enquiry form is sent to the appellant asking for the details to be completed, allowing 14 days for a response, and is not restricted to Personal Independence Payments or Employment Support allowance, when not received on the prescribed for the enquiry form is sent on any type of benefit appeal.
Within the Direct Lodgment Process, we are not aware of any process were enquiry forms are routinely sent on an appeal received on an SSCS1 form. The process to send a hearing enquiry form out when an appeal is received in letter has been the process from July 2013. The number of forms that have been sent out since 2013 is 108,202.
Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether HM Courts and Tribunal Service is sending a copy of the new enquiry form being sent to disabled and unwell people in respect personal independence payments or employment and support allowance to that person's advocate or representative where the contact details of that person or organisation have already been included on the original SSCS1 appeal form.
Answered by Rory Stewart
The Social Security and Child Benefit (SSCS) Direct Lodgement Centre, based in Bradford, has since April 2013 dealt with the receipt, compliance checking and case creation of all SSCS appeals for England and Wales. This includes appeals against decisions on all Department for Work and Pensions administered benefits, alongside the following from HMRC: Child Tax Credits, Working Tax Credits, and Child Benefit.
The prescribed form for a lodgment of an appeal is the SSCS1 form, and on receipt of a compliant appeal in this form the DLC would not issue a further hearing enquiry form. Appeals are accepted without an SSCS1 form, usually received in the form of a letter, and in these circumstances a hearing enquiry form is sent to the appellant, and the DLC would send the enquiry form to the appellants contact details only. Within the Direct Lodgment Process, we are not aware of any process were enquiry forms are routinely sent on an appeal received on an SSCS1 form.
Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, for what reasons HM Courts and Tribunal Service is sending a new enquiry form to disabled/unwell people who have already submitted an SSCS1 appealing against the refusal of personal independence payments or employment and support allowance which asks the appellant if they with to continue with their appeal; and whether an appellant will be removed from the waiting list for a hearing and their appeal ended if they do not complete and return the new enquiry form within 14 days.
Answered by Rory Stewart
The Social Security and Child Benefit (SSCS) Direct Lodgement Centre (DLC), based in Bradford, has since April 2013 dealt with the receipt, compliance checking and case creation of all SSCS appeals for England and Wales. This includes appeals against decisions on all Department for Work and Pensions administered benefits, alongside the following from HMRC: Child Tax Credits, Working Tax Credits, and Child Benefit.
Following the launch and acceptance of a lodged appeal the DLC will forward to one of 7 Regional Centres for progression of the case. The prescribed form for a lodgment of an appeal is the SSCS1 form, and on receipt of a compliant appeal in this form the DLC would not issue a further hearing enquiry form.
However appeals made without the form, usually received in letter form are accepted and in these circumstances a hearing enquiry form is sent to the appellant. If a response is not received within the timescale the Regional Centre would issue a reminder to the appellant on the tribunal standard letter DL2, this provides an opportunity for the appellant to inform the tribunal if they have now decided not to continue the appeal, however the appeal can only be stopped if the appellant tells the tribunal to do so. This is for all types of benefit and is not restricted to Personal Independence Payments or Employment Support allowance. Within the Direct Lodgment Process, we are not aware of any process were enquiry forms are routinely sent on an appeal received on an SSCS1 form.
Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answers of 5 and 12 January 2016 to Questions 20499 and 20722, what assessment his Department has made of the relationship between trends in the levels of motor accident rates and claims payments since 2006.
Answered by Dominic Raab
Government data indicates that claims volumes remain at historically high levels. Over a similar period data from the Department for Transport shows accident rates have fallen by around 25%. This is clear evidence that the system is in need of further reform, which is why on 25 November 2015, in his Autumn Statement, the Chancellor announced new measures to reduce the cost and number of whiplash claims. The Government will consult on the detail of these reforms in due course and the consultation document will be accompanied by an impact assessment.
Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 12 January 2016 to Question 20722, what assessment he has made of the accuracy of the published industry estimates used to formulate the announcement about the motor insurance industry in the Autumn Statement 2015.
Answered by Dominic Raab
The Government received data from numerous sources, and the industry estimates do not differ significantly from other available figures.
The Government will continue to work with a wide range of stakeholders in taking forward the new reforms and will consult on the detail in due course. The consultation will be accompanied by an impact assessment.
Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions his Department has had with Chief Crown Prosecutors on the decision not to prosecute any individuals for suspected electoral and financial fraud committed in Tower Hamlets during the mayoral election there in 2014.
Answered by Andrew Selous
The Ministry of Justice has not had any discussions with Chief Crown Prosecutors on this matter.
Decisions on whether to charge or to prosecute individuals suspected of electoral and financial fraud in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets are matters for the Metropolitan Police and the Crown Prosecution Service. I refer my Honorable Friend to Mr. Marcus Jones’ response to Parliamentary Question 29350.
Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the potential effect of the proposed closure of Bow County Court on access to justice for the residents of Poplar and Limehouse constituency.
Answered by Shailesh Vara
The consultation closed on 8 October. HM Courts & Tribunals Service is currently evaluating all responses submitted, and will take into account any potential impacts identified from the responses received.
No decision has been taken to close any court and an announcement on the outcome of the consultation will be made in due course.
Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people were (a) cautioned, (b) proceeded against and (c) convicted of an offence under the provisions of the (i) Game Act 1831, (ii) Deer Act 1991, (iii) Protection of Badgers Act 1992, (iv) Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, (v) Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996, (vi) Animal Welfare Act 2006, (vii) Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994 and Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, (viii) Hunting Act 2004, (ix) Night Poaching Act 1828, (x) Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) Regulations 1997, (xi) Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976, (xii) Pests Act 1954 and (xiii) Conservation of Seals Act 1970 in each year since 2009.
Answered by Mike Penning
The number of offenders cautioned and defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty at all courts for offences (all in England and Wales from 2009 to 2013) under the Game Act 1831 can be viewed in Table 1, under the Deer Act 1991 in Table 2, under the Protection of Badgers act 1992 in Table 3, under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 in Table 4, under the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 in Table 5, under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 in Table 6, under the Conservation of Seals Act 1970 in Table 7, under the Night Poaching Act 1828 in Table 8, under the Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) Regulations 1997 in Table 9, under the Hunting Act 2004 in Table 10 and under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 in Table 11. The tables can be found in the Library. Data for the Pests Act 1954, the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 and the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994 is held as part of a miscellaneous group that cannot be separately analysed.We are very clear that serious offences will always go to court where tough punishments are available to the independent judiciary, who make their sentencing decisions based on the individual facts of the case.
Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate his Department has made of the effect on insurance premiums of personal injury insurance fraud in the last year for which information is available; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Shailesh Vara
The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.
No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.
The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 - worth £441m - as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.
As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.
Asked by: Jim Fitzpatrick (Labour - Poplar and Limehouse)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will take steps to reform civil procedure rules to clarify courts' powers to strike out cases due to exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Shailesh Vara
The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.
No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.
The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 - worth £441m - as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.
As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.