You are on page 1of 3

HM Courts &

Tribunals Service

Justices' Clerk for
Humber & South Yorkshire
Ooncaster Justice Centre South
College Road
OX 703001 Ooncaster 5

When calling please ask for: Judicial Support Unit

Direct Line: 01302308300

T: 01302 308300
E: SY&

Gifmsoy- -----North East Lincolnshire

Our ref: AW/CA
Your ref:

22 July 2016

I was forwarded on 5 July 2016 your email correspondence of 25 June 2016 addressed to
HMCTS Customer Service.
In reply to the key points made in your e mail I would respond as follows:
Initial Delay
It is regrettable that a delay was caused following receipt of your application to state a case. I
understand from you that you had been in correspondence with Mr Draper (Deputy Justices'
Clerk) at Grimsby Magistrates' Court for some time prior to his departure from HMCS (the
organisation was then called).
Only some time after his departure did it become clear that your matter had not been reallocated
for ongoing supervision by another member of HMCS staff was the case then escalated to me. At
the time there was no other member of staff available to whom to allocate supervision of the case.
Unnecessary Claim for Mandatory Order
In correspondence sent to you on 24 January 2013 it was made clear that the recognizance
sought by the court was not a sum of money to be paid by you. You would only become liable to
pay in the event that an appeal was not pursued by you in the Administrative Court. The figure
stated in the recognizance was not a sum you had to pay over immediately, unlike a fee for which
it subsequently became clear you were entitled to remission owing to your financial
circumstances. Until such time as you came to the magistrates' court to enter into the
recognizance required by the magistrates, no further work on preparation of a draft case could
take place. By attending court to enter into the recognizance the court would have been in a
position to review the amount of the recognizance as you could have informed the Justices of your
financial circumstances which may have resulted .in a different amount being ordered. You did not
attend as requested, thus time passed without the matter progressing much further.

You then chose to exercise your right to go to the High Court in this matter. The magistrates' court
decided in the interests of saving public money and court time to offer to state a case
notwithstanding the absence of your having not attended court to enter into a recognizance as had
been requested of you. This did not represent any change form the court's original intention to
state a case, just a willingness not to require a recognizance before doing so.


to get Final Case

It is correct that not every item of email correspondence received from you received a reply for
which I apologise. However, attempts to make communication with you a little easier owing to the
almost constant requirement for me to be absent form my office to fulfil duties in accordance with
my role were not met with success as whilst you did telephone my office when I was not available
you were unwilling to leave a telephone number to enable me to return your calls.
You were sent the final case under cover of correspondence 19 December 2013. Upon receipt of
your letter of 13 February 2014 I wrote to you on 20 February 2014 to advise you there was no
need to enter into a recognizance as the Court had already stated a case and I re-sent the case to
you under cover of the same letter. I apologise that I did not follow up my email to you of 6 March
2014 as promised. When I received your letter of 22 April 2014 seeking a certificate of refusal to
state a case, under cover of a letter dated 1 May 20141 replied to say that the Court would not be
issuing a certificate of refusal to state a case as it had stated a case. I enclosed a further copy of
the case with the correspondence.


Complaint to Humber Advisory


You made a complaint about the conduct of the magistrates who adjudicated upon your case in
the magistrates' court. Your complaint was referred to the Advisory Committee and was
investigated and dismissed in the exercise of the powers assigned to it. You were informed of the
outcome under cover of a letter 16 September 2014 and were advised of the right of review by the
Judicial Ombudsman.
Subsequent to this I received an email from Judicial Office on 15 May 2015 and from Judicial
Conduct and Investigations Office on 29 June 2015 which respectively both forwarded messages
from you indicating that you had not heard an outcome which in turn caused me to send you copy
of the letter of 16 September 2014 under cover of letters 29 May 20156 July 2015 respectively. In
accordance with your rights you challenged the matter first with the Judicial Conduct and
Investigations Office and second with the Judicial Ombudsman but yourcomplaint was not upheld.
In light of your indication in your email of 25 February 2016 that you had not received the case I
undertook to send this to you by 15 April 2016. Under cover of a letter of that date the case was
re-sent to you by first class post on 18 April 2016 as unfortunately my correspondence had missed
the post when submitted for posting on 15 April 2016. No correspondence that has been sent by
me to you has been returned by Royal Mail.
I acknowledge and apologise for the slight error in the post code in correspondence relating to the
Advisory Committee matter. Had this error prevented Royal Mail from delivering the
correspondence I would have expected that it would have been returned to me.


If you are unhappy with this reply you may seek a review of it by contacting
Julie Collins
Cluster Manager - Humber & South Yorkshire
HMCourts & Tribunals Service
Leeds Magistrates Court & Family Hearing Centre
PO Box 97

Yours sincerely

Justices' Clerk for Humber and South Yorkshire