Case Stated Application Missing Docs

Justices' Clerk for Humber & South
Yorkshire
Doncaster Magistrates Court
PO Box 49
The Law Courts
College Road
Doncaster DN1 3HT
Grimsby
North East Lincolnshire
19 August 2013
Dear Mrs Watts

Re: North East Lincolnshire Council V
Grimsby and Cleethorpes Magistrates' Court - 2 November
2012 Application to State a Case
In accordance with Rule 77 (2) of the Magistrates' Courts Rules 1981, there is enclosed,
representations made on the content of the draft case.
May I respectfully draw to your attention that in accordance with rule 78 of the Magistrates' Courts
Rules 1981 you have within 21 days after the latest day on which representations may be made
under rule 77 to state and sign the case.
Yours sincerely
HM Courts &
Tribunals Service
FILE
MrsAWatts
Justices' Clerk for
Humber & South Yorkshire
Ooncaster Magistrates'
PO Box 49
The Law Courts
College Road
OONCASTER
ON13HT
OX: 742840 (Doncaster

When calling please ask for: Cellne AlIerton
Direct Line: 01302 34no~
Court
20)
T: 01302 347303/304
F: 01302 327906
E: celine.allerton@hmcts.gsLgov.uk
karen.crocken@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Mr
~----_.
Minicom
VII: 01302 369066
mt
www.justice.gov.uk
-uffmsby
DN320QJ
19 December 2013
Our ref: AW/CA
Re: Application
to State a Case
I acknowledge receipt of your representations upon the draft case.

North East Lincolnshire Council sought an extension to the time in which they may submit
representations on the draft case as the Council stated that they had not received the draft case.
This request was granted.
Enclosed herewith is the final case.
If you wish to pursue your appeal, the case must be lodged with the Administrative Court Office at
the Royal Courts of Justice within 10 days of receiving it from this office, and within four days of
lodging the case, the you must serve on the Respondent a notice of entry of the appeal together
with a copy of the case.
I shall be grateful if you would kindly acknowledge receipt of this correspondence and enclosure.
Yours sincerely
Mrs A Watts
Justices' Clerk
Enc
PROTECT-PERSONAL

Yorkshire
PO Box 49
The Law Courts
College Road
Doncaster DN1 3HT
Grimsby
10 January 2014
Dear Mrs Watts

I refer to the draft case received 30 July 2013 and the 21 day time limit from receipt of the draft
case to submit any written representations upon its content.
May I bring it to your attention that on 19 August 2013, representations were served together with
letter advising the Court it had (from the latest day on which representations may be made) 21
days to state and sign the case in accordance with rule 78 of the Magistrates' Courts Rules 1981.
Accordingly, the final signed case was expected on or before 10 September 2013 (overrun by 4
months). I would therefore like to know why the justices have decided against complying with the
relevant rules.
Yours sincerely

Yorkshire
PO Box 49
The Law Courts
College Road
Doncaster DN1 3HT
Grimsby
13 February 2014
Dear Mrs Watts

Further to there being no response to my letter of 10.1.14, I am left not knowing why the justices
did not state the case in accordance with rule 78 of the Magistrates' Courts Rules 1981.
It must be assumed that the court only gave an undertaking to serve the draft case, re
acknowledgement of service (Judicial Review 8.7.13) and not intended delivering the case stated
until recognizance had been agreed.
As a consequence of the judicial review claim, I understand that despite a sum (500) being
stated in your letter (24.1.13), the appropriateness and/or the amount may be considered on
agreeing recognizance. It would appear that if this appeal is to be progressed it will be conditional
on entering into recognizance. I therefore ask that arrangements are made for this to take place
and await your response.
Yours sincerely
fiLE
HM Courts &
Tribunals Service
MrsAWatts
Justices' Clerk for
Ooncaster Magistrates' Court
PO Box 49
The Law Courts
College Road
DONCASTER ON13HT
When calling please ask for: Karen Crocken

Direct Line: 01302347303
20)
T: 01302 3473031304
F: 01302 327906
Mr
Minicom VII: 01302 369066
ant
www.justice.gov.uk
'-='1TITJ50Y

DN320QJ
Our ref: AW/KC
20 February 2014
Dear Mr r-''''
Re: Application
to State a Case
I acknowledge receipt of your letter of 13 February 2014.

As the Court has agreed to state case which was sent to you on 19 December 2013, there is no
longer cl requirement for you to enter into a recognizance.
I have enclosed with this correspondence a further copy of the case.
May I remind you that if you wish to pursue your appeal, the case must be lodged with the
Administrative Court Office at the Royal Courts of Justice within 10 days of receiving it from this
office, and within four days of lodging the case, the you must serve on the Respondent a notice of
entry of the appeal together with a copy of the case
Yours sincerely
Mrs A Watts
Justices' Clerk
PROTECT-PERSONAL
Page 1 of 1
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
Watts, Alison <alison.watts@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>

"Xxx" <xxx.xxxxx@btopenworld.com>
06 March 2014 10:06
Case Stated
Good Morning Mr Xxxxx

I am sorry that I have not been available to speak with you when you have called my office.
I understand that it is not possible for me to contact you by telephone and that you would prefer me to contact
you by e mail.
I am due to be in meetings all day today but I will have written communication with you either later today or
first thing tomorrow setting out the position with your case and advising you on next steps.
Yours sincerely
Alison Watts (Mrs)
Justices' Clerk for Humber and South Yorkshire
Doncaster Magistrates' Court
P O Box 49
College Road
Doncaster
DN1 3HT
Tel: 01302 347303
Fax: 01302 327906
This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.
Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.
This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.
The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning
service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number
2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal
purposes.
08/06/2016

Yorkshire
PO Box 49
The Law Courts
College Road
Doncaster DN1 3HT
Grimsby
22 April 2014
Dear Mrs Watts

Thank you for your email of 6 March 2014 in which you stated:
I will have written communication with you either later today or first thing tomorrow
setting out the position with your case and advising you on next steps.
I did not receive the aforementioned communication, neither have subsequent calls to your office
made 19 and 28 March prompted a response. The net result being that the case, for which the
Magistrates owe a legal duty to state for the opinion of the High Court, has not been stated.
As no contact has been made regarding my 13 February 2014 letter to agree recognizance and
every attempt to proceed with the appeal has drawn a blank, it appears the court is refusing to
state the case.
Pursuant to section 111(5) of the MCA 1980, a magistrate can refuse to state a case, but must
consider the application 'frivolous'. The meaning of the term was considered by the Civil Division of
the Court of Appeal in (R v Mildenhall Magistrates' Court, ex p Forest District Council). The then
Lord Chief Justice in considering the meaning of 'frivolous' was of the view that in the context, the
Court should consider the application to be futile, misconceived, hopeless or academic. He went on
to say that such a conclusion was not one to which the justices can properly come simply because
they consider their decision to be right or immune from challenge.
Presuming the application is not considered 'frivolous' (a draft has been produced) there is no
obvious reason why the court has not stated the case as legally required. However, as the court
may only refuse on these grounds then I require a certificate stating that the application has been
refused (section 111(5) MCA 1980) setting out the reasons why, so I may under section 111(6)
seek a second mandatory order from the Administrative Court requiring the case to be stated.
Yours sincerely
HM Courts &
FiltP'
f'l
iI
U
Tribunals Service
MrsAWatts
Justices' Clerk for
Doncaster Magistrates' Court
PO Box 49
The Law Courts
College Road
DONCASTER DN13HT
DX: 742840 (Doncaster
When calling please ask for: Karen Crocken

20)
T: 01302 347303/304
F: 01302 327906
MrN
Minicom VII: 01302 369066
It
www.justice.gov.uk
-GrTmSOY ---------

DN320QJ
Our ref: AW/KC
Dear
Mr
1 May 2014
"",.a{l
Re: Application
to State a Case
I acknowledge receipt of your letter of 22 April 2014.

The Court has already stated a case for the opinion of the High Court which was sent to you under
cover of correspondence dated 19 December 2013 and 20 February 2014. Accordingly the Court
will not be issuing a certificate of refusal to state a case.
I have enclosed with .this correspondence a further copy of the case.
entry of the appeal together with a copy of the case.
Yours sincerely
Mrs A Watts
Justices' Clerk
Enc
PROTECT~PERSONAL
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
Watts, Alison" <Alison.Watts@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>
09 July 2014 11:18
Restricted Contact - Application to State a Case - Grimsby Magistrates' Court
Dear Mrs Watts

Restricted Contact - Application to State a Case - Grimsby Magistrates' Court
With regards communication with Humber and South Yorkshire, I would like informing whether Her Majestys
Courts and Tribunals Service has any arrangements in place to restrict my contact.
If so, I wish to know in what/which way(s) the organisation has restricted contact. For example, this may be by
telephone, email, letter etc., or a combination of these. It may be that the organisation has blocked emails
without telling me and would like to know if this is the case.
I look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely
07/01/2017
Central Secretariat Office

P O Box 49
The Law Courts, College Road
Doncaster
DN1 3HT
Grimsby
DN
02 September 2014
Dear Sir/Madam
Re: Complaint into conduct of Mr J A O'Nions JP and Mr T A Shepherdson JP

I have concerns arising from a Council Tax Liability Order hearing on 2nd November 2012 for
which both Mr O'Nions and Mr Shepherdson adjudicated and granted an order enabling the Local
Authority to enforce payment of an unpaid element of court summons costs which the council
claimed it had incurred.
An application was subsequently submitted to the Magistrates court to state a case for an appeal to
the High Court regarding the order. The events leading on from this are what I believe is evidence
that the Magistrates conduct has been such to pervert the course of justice.
At ANNEX A is a draft chronology of events (intended for the case bundle) which I regard as being
sufficient to initially investigate this matter. As and when any letters and emails referred to in the
chronology become relevant, those details of course can be forwarded to you.
Yours sincerely
THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND LORD CHANCELLOR'S

HUMBER ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON JUSTICES OF THE PEACE
Mrs A Watts
Secretary to the Humber Advisory Committee
Cline Allerton / Karen Crocken
Secretarys Assistants
celine.allerton@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Mr X Yyyyyy
XY Xxxxx Yyyyy
Grimsby
DN32 XYY

P O Box 49
DONCASTER DN1 3HT
Tel: 01302 347303/4
Fax: 01302 327906
Our Ref: AW/KC
Date: 16 September 2014
Dear Mr Yyyyyy
Re: Complaint
I acknowledge receipt of your letter of 2 September 2014.
I can confirm that the complaint you made in relation to the conduct of Mr J A O'Nions JP and Mr T
A Shepherdson JP has been referred to the Deputy Chairman of the Humber Advisory Committee
in accordance with the prescribed procedures contained within the Judicial Conduct (Magistrates)
Rules 2014.
Having considered your complaint, in accordance with the powers available to him under the
Rules, the Deputy Chairman of the Advisory Committee dismissed your complaint in respect of
both magistrates. The decision to dismiss the complaint was made first on the basis it related to a
judicial decision made in proceedings against you which did not a raise a question of misconduct
by the magistrates, and second that the actions you have complained of were not done or caused
to be done by the magistrates. A certificate of refusal to state a case was not issued by the
Justices because they did state a case for the consideration of the Administrative Court and the
final case has been sent to you.
If you feel that the Advisory Committee has not handled this case properly, you can complain to the
Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman. Please note that the Ombudsman can only
consider a complaint about the handling of this complaint and he has no power to investigate the
conduct issue itself.
The Ombudsman will be able to investigate your complaint about the handling of this complaint if
you write to him within 28 days of receipt of the Committee's decision. After that period he will
consider whether it is appropriate to investigate it. Further information about the Ombudsman may
be found at www.judicialombudsman.gov.uk. The office of the Judicial Appointments and Conduct
Ombudsman can be contacted in writing at 9th Floor, The Tower, 102 Petty France, London SW1h
9AJ, by e mail at headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk or by telephone on 020 3334 2900.
Yours sincerely
Mrs A Watts
Secretary to the Advisory Committee
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Attach:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
<magistrateshrteam@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk>
14 May 2015 18:00
Advisory Committee complaint 2 Sept 2014.doc
Advisory Committee complaint 2 Sept 2014
Dear Sir/Madam
I would appreciate informing whether the attached complaint will ever be replied to.
As you will notice from the date, over eight months has passed since submitting the complaint (by post) and I
am yet to receive acknowledgement.
It is my belief that the Secretary to the Advisory Committee for the Humber to whom the complaint was
addressed is also the Justices Clerk incolved in the case for which allegations have been made in respect of
perverting the course of justice.
It is for this reason I believe an attempt is also being made (as in my High Court application) to prevent this
complaint from being addressed.
Yours sincerely
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"magistrateshrteam" <magistrateshrteam@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk>
"
"<
@gmail.com>
15 May 2015 10:42
RE: Advisory Committee complaint 2 Sept 2014
Dear Mr
I am sorry that your complaint has taken long to be replied to.
I have been advised by my Policy manager that your email has been forwarded to the Justice Clerk &
Advisory Committee Sec for Humber & South Yorks, Alison Watts. This is all we can do from our office, as the
subject matter isn't something for us to get involved with.
kind regards
Robinah Luwuge | Magistrates HR Team | Judicial Office | 10th Floor I Thomas More Building | Royal Courts
of Justice I London WC2A 2LL | Telephone Number 0207 073 4810
Email: robinah.luwuge@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk
www.judiciary.gov.uk
05/06/2016

Mrs A Watts
Mr X Yyyyy
XY Xxxxx Yyyyy
Grimsby
DN32 XYY

P O Box 49
DONCASTER DN1 3HT
Tel: 01302 347303/4
Our Ref: AW/KC

Date: 29 May 2015
Re: Complaint
I have been contacted by Judicial Office in connection with your complaint of 2 September 2014.
This matter was responded to by the Humber Advisory Committee on 16 September 2014 and I
enclose herewith a further copy of that reply.
Yours sincerely
Mrs A Watts
Enc
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Attach:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
<judy.anckorn@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk>
25 June 2015 06:48
Fw: Advisory Committee complaint 2 Sept 2014
Dear Ms Anckorn
Re: Advisory Committee complaint 2 Sept 2014
I have concerns that my complaint (attached) is deliberately being ignored because the Advisory Committee
Secretary, to whom the complaint is addressed, is also the Justices Clerk involved in the case for which
allegations have been made in respect of perverting the course of justice.
I have made an attempt, as the correspondence chain verifies, to submit the complaint through another
channel because of the conflict of interest. As is also evident, the email was simply forwarded to the Advisory
Committee Secretary, from whom there has been no reply (and unlikely to be).
I might add that recently a case concerning matters not dissimilar to the issues raised in my case stated
appeal (November 2012) to the High Court has resulted in successful appeal and judgment praising the
appellant and Pro Bono legal reps for bringing the case before the court. Mrs Justice Andrews described the
appeal, [2015] EWHC 1252 (Admin), as raising 'issues of significant public interest to both council tax payers
and local authorities'.
I believe the costs claimed against the defendant in the case referred to was in the sum of 33,000 and
wonder if the effort put into preventing my case progressing, as detailed in my complaint to the Advisory
Committee, was to prevent a similar outcome.
Will you please ensure that my complaint is addressed.
Yours sincerely
.
From:
To:
Sent:
Attach:
Subject:
"Anckorn, Judy" <judy.anckorn@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk>

"
"<
@gmail.com>
29 June 2015 12:55
Dear Mr
I have e-mailed Ms Watts today to ask when you might receive a reply, however, she is away currently away
from the office. I hope she will contact you directly. If however, you remain dissatisfied with the way in which
the advisory committee has handled your complaint, you may complain to the Judicial Appointment and
Conduct Ombudsman; you may do so my e-mailing headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk further information about
the Ombudsmans remit may be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/judicial-appointments-and-conduct-ombudsman
I hope this is of assistance to you.
Yours sincerely
Judy Anckorn I Head of the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office, Press and Communications I
81 - 82 Queens Building I Royal Courts of Justice I Strand I London WC2A 2LL I Phone: 020
7073 4719 I http://judicialconduct.judiciary.gov.uk/
05/06/2016

Mrs A Watts
Mr X Yyyyyy
XY Xxxxxx Yyyyyy
Grimsby
DN32 XYY

P O Box 49
DONCASTER DN1 3HT
Tel: 01302 347303/4
Our Ref: AW/KC

Date: 6 July 2015
Re: Complaint
I have been contacted by Judicial Conduct Investigations Office in connection with your
complaint of 2 September 2014.
This matter was responded to by the Humber Advisory Committee on 16 September 2014
and I enclose herewith a further copy of that reply.
Yours sincerely
Mrs A Watts
Enc
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Attach:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
<headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>
08 August 2015 19:11
Dear Sir/Madam
I wish to escalate a complaint to the Judicial Appointment and Conduct Ombudsman which was initially
submitted to the Advisory Committee for Humber & South Yorks on 2 September 2014.
The complaint has never been acknowledged and several enquiries have been made as to why
correspondence has been ignore. All efforts to elicit a response have been unsuccessful.
I have briefly visited the Judicial Appointments & Conduct Ombudsman website and believe maybe this
process requires the completion of an application form. I have not looked any further into this purely for the
reason that every 'proper' procedure I have followed so far (protracting over several years) has led to a deadend.
You may appreciate that I am keen for the hoops through which I'm being made to jump are kept to as few
as possible to reach a satisfactory conclusion. I therefore hope this email, attachment and brief history of
email communications will be sufficient to get an investigation underway.
Yours sincerely
From:
To:
Sent:
Attach:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
<headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>
19 August 2015 10:20
Dear Sir/Madam
I would like acknowledgement of the email sent 8 August 2015 (see below).
Yours sincerely
05/06/2016
Judicial Appointments & Conduct

Ombudsman
Postal Area 9.53
th
9 Floor, The Tower
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
DX 152380 Westminster 8
PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

Our ref: 15- MISC
T 020 3334 2900

E headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk
www.judicialombudsman.gov.uk
Mr Xxxx Xxxxx
By e-mail: xxxxxxxxxxxx@gmail.com
December 2015
JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS AND CONDUCT OMBUDSMANS OFFICE

It has come to my notice that you have had neither a reply nor an
acknowledgement to your e-mails of 8 and 19 August 2015 in connection with
a matter that you had previously raised with the Advisory Committee for
Yorkshire and South Humberside in September 2014.
I would like to apologise for this. This Office receives a large volume of
correspondence and, although it should not happen, there is always a
possibility that some might slip through the net. However, post should
certainly not remain unanswered when people write alerting us to the fact that
they have not received a response. I can only apologise for our shortcomings
in this regard.
You are aware that the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsmans
remit enables him to consider concerns about the process by which complaints
against Judicial Office Holders are dealt with under the arrangements for
dealing with personal conduct matters. We describe this as a second tier
investigation function. There are a number of organisations who might be
responsible for conducting first tier investigations into Judicial Office Holders
personal conduct. They include Advisory Committees, who are responsible for
considering complaints about Magistrates in their area. Advisory Committees
are required to consider whether there are issues in a Magistrates personal
conduct that might warrant a disciplinary sanction and, if so, to refer the matter
to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO).
The Ombudsman can consider whether the process followed by first tier
bodies was in accordance with the set down procedures for dealing with
judicial conduct matters (ie the Judicial Conduct (Magistrates) Rules 2014 and
associated guidance) or whether there was any other aspect of
maladministration. The Ombudsman cannot say whether the first tier body
reached the correct decision. Nor can he comment on matters that are
considered under arrangements other than those for dealing with judicial
conduct matters and he cannot consider any issues thatrare before the Courts.
I attach a copy of an Annex to the Ombudsmans 2006/07 Annual Report,

which includes a discussion of maladministration. You will see that it might
encompass matters such as delay and inattention.
The Ombudsman does not normally accept complaints for investigation until
the relevant first tier investigation has been concluded. There us one
exception to this. In exceptional circumstances he will consider concerns about
delay in investigating a first tier complaint before the first tier investigation has
finished. Accepting a complaint about delay whilst an investigation is ongoing
would not preclude the Ombudsman from conducting a further investigation
after the first tier investigating body has concluded its deliberations.
The position as I understand it from the papers you have sent is that you
submitted a complaint on 2 September 2014 to the Central Secretariat Office
at Doncaster Magistrates Court. You said that you had concerns arising from a
Council Tax Liability Order hearing in November 2012 and provided a
chronology of events which you suggested was evidence that the Magistrates
conduct has been such to pervert the course of justice. You provided a copy
of correspondence that you had sent to the Judicial Office in May 2015 and to
the JCIO in June 2015, both of whom said that they would alert the Justices
Clerk to your concerns.
It appears from the documents you have sent that, as of August 2015, the
Advisory Committee had not responded to any of your correspondence about
the matter. If the case is still unresolved you may wish to ask the Ombudsman
to consider the process by which the Advisory Committee has handled the
matter to this point. If so I would be grateful if you could confirm and provide
permission for this Office to disclose your complaint and correspondence to the
Advisory Committee and for the Advisory Committee to provide this Office with
copies of its documents.
You may be aware that information on the Ombudsmans role and remit is contained
on his website (https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/judicial-appointmentsand-conduct-ombudsman). This includes a form that people can fill in order to submit
a complaint (I attach an electronic copy). However, if you are only asking the
Ombudsman to consider concerns that the Advisory Committee had not responded
to your concerns then you might believe that you have already set out your concerns
about the process and that all you need to do would be to provide permission to
disclose the complaint and file, as discussed above.
We look forward to hearing from you if you want the Ombudsman to consider
issues regarding delay by Yorkshire and South Humberside Advisory
Committee up to this point. If you wish to pursue a further complaint after the
Advisory Committees deliberations are complete you would need to set out
exactly why you believe that the Advisory Committee failed to follow a correct
process and provide us with written permission to disclose, as discussed
above (the best way of doing this might be to complete a complaint form). It
would also be helpful if you could provide a copy of the Advisory Committees
final response to your complaint. Please also be aware that the Constitutional
Reform Act 2005 generally requires that people submit complaint to the
Ombudsman within twenty eight days of being notified of the decision reached
by the first tier body (there is scope to consider complaints received outside
that timeframe if the Ombudsman considers it reasonable in all the
circumstances).
I hope that this information is helpful. I apologise again for the very poor handling of
your previous correspondence.
Joan Wilson
Acting Head of Office
Page 1 of 1
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"Xxx" <xxxxxxxxxxxx@gmail.com>
"Wilson, Joan (JACO)" <Joan.Wilson@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>
18 December 2015 17:17
Re: Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
Dear Ms Wilson
Thank you for your attached letter to your 14 December 2015 email in which
you have detailed an option available to me to pursue my complaint.
I confirm that the Advisory Committee had not responded to any of my
correspondence about the matter and the case is still unresolved and wish to
ask the Ombudsman to consider the process by which the Advisory Committee
has handled the matter to this point
I confirm that my permission is given for your Office to disclose my
complaint and correspondence to the Advisory Committee and for the Advisory
Committee to provide your Office with copies of its documents.
Yours sincerely
X. Xxxxx
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"headofoffice" <headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>
<xxxxxxxxxxxx@gmail.com>
22 December 2015 17:03
Re : Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
Dear Mr Xxxxx,
Thank you for your email to Ms Joan Wilson dated 18 December 2015.
We will now request your complaint file from the Advisory Committee and you will be written
to again when it has been received and considered.
Yours sincerely,
Mrs C Achila
JACO
05/06/2016
Page 1 of 1
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Attach:
Subject:
"Jones, Adam (JACO)" <Adam.Jones@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>

23 February 2016 15:15
Mr Xxxxx Letter 16.9.14.pdf; Mr Xxxxx Letter 29.5.15.pdf; Mr Xxxxx Letter 6.7.15.pdf
Your complaint to the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
Dear Mr Xxxxx,
Further to your correspondence to the Ombudsman about the Humber Advisory Committee not replying to or
dealing with your complaint about two Magistrates, which you initially made on 2 September 2014. I am sorry
for the delay in writing to you. It took a significant amount of time to obtain the complaint file from the Advisory
Committee, which was received last week.
Having considered the complaint file, I noted that the Advisory Committee had letters on file that were sent to
you in response to your correspondence to them, the Judicial Office and the Judicial Conduct Investigations
Office. I attach them for your perusal.
As your complaint to the Ombudsman related to the Advisory Committee not replying to or dealing with your
complaint, I ask you to consider the letters attached and then advise me whether you wish to continue, close
or amend your complaint to the Ombudsman.
I would be grateful for a reply by 9 March 2016.
Yours sincerely,
Adam Jones
JACO
05/06/2016
Page 1 of 1
Xxx
From:
To:
Cc:
Sent:
Subject:
"Watts, Alison" <alison.watts@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>
25 February 2016 18:15
Application to State a Case - Grimsby Magistrates' Court
Dear Mrs Watts

The Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman has made me aware of three letters it appears you sent
me, dated 16 September 2014, 29 May and 6 July 2015.
Although I now have copies of all three letters, none of these reached me and I was not aware they had been
sent, neither did I receive the final case stated which in your 16 September 2014 letter you say was sent to
me. The Ombudsman, however, has not sent a copy of the case stated and so would like to have that in order
to proceed with my application to the High Court.
If you agree to this would you please clearly state the original date and an effective date of service so I can
ensure the relevant papers are served within the 10 day time limit under the procedure rules.
Yours sincerely
X. Xxxxx
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
27 February 2016 21:54
Re: Your complaint to the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
Dear Mr Jones
As you will be aware from the email I sent on 25 February 2016 to Mrs Watts, I never received the
letters which have been obtained from the Advisory Committee until you sent copies. Neither did I receive the
final case stated, which in the 16 September 2014 letter Mrs Watts says was sent to me. Moreover, I have still
not been sent a copy, nor do I know when that document was sent.
This all puts a different perspective on the complaint. Had I received the reply in September 2014, the
complaint would have turned to a different matter which would essentially have been to focus on when the
final case stated had been produced/sent and why it had not reached me. Incidentally, it can now be verified
that the Deputy Chairman of the Advisory Committee who dealt with the complaint had mistakenly understood
the issues to relate to the Magistrates' decision at the court hearing. My complaint letter clearly defined the
issue, i.e. the mishandling of the application to state a case for an appeal to the High Court which were events
leading on from the judicial decision referred to by the Deputy Chairman. The complaint letter was also clear
in stating that the detail supplied was just preliminary information to get an investigation underway.
Regarding the issues as they now stand, it would seem an investigation should turn to one of establishing why
there was never a reply to several communications querying the missing document (final case stated), which
according to the relevant procedure rules, should have been served on or before 10 September 2013.
From August 2013 when the representations upon the draft case were submitted up until September
2014 (Advisory Committee complaint), the Court was contacted a total nine times in connection with obtaining
the finalised document. All communications were ignored except one (6 March 2014) to which Mrs Watts
replied with an undertaking to have written communication setting out the position with the case and advising
of the next steps. This undertaking was never acted on.
In answer to your 23 February email, after considering the letters I now hold it would be most appropriate to
amend my complaint to consider what is set out above.
Yours sincerely
X. Xxxxx
05/06/2016
Page 1 of 1
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:

03 March 2016 13:23
RE: Your complaint to the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
Dear Mr Xxxxx,
Thank you for your email and clarifying the issues you now wish to pursue.
I note your concerns now relate to the time period between August 2013 and September 2014 and the
concern that the Court was contacted nine times by you in connection with obtaining the finalised
Court document. You state that the Court only replied once, but did not act on their undertaking to write to
you. Please let me know if my understanding is incorrect.
If this is your complaint, it would appear that the Ombudsman's office is not the appropriate body to take
forward your concerns. The Ombudsman can only consider your concerns about how the Advisory Committee
handled your judicial misconduct complaint about the two Magistrates, i.e. any concerns arising from the
complaint you made in September 2014 and thereafter.
Concerns about the Court not responding to your communications about the missing document would need to
be made to the Court Manager in the first instance. However, if (as you state) the Court has failed to respond
to your communications, you can escalate your concerns to Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service,
Complaint Handling and Enquiries Team. Their contact details are
Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service
Complaint Handling and Enquiries Team,
Zone C,
1st Floor,
102 Petty France,
London
SW1H 9AJ
Email - ComplaintsCorres<@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
I would be grateful, in light of the information I have provided in this email, if you still feel you have a complaint
that falls within the Ombudsman's remit (solely about the Advisory Committee's handling of your complaint
about the two Magistrates).
I hope this information is of assistance and I look forward to hearing from you, by 10 March 2016.
Yours sincerely,
Adam Jones
JACO
05/06/2016
Page 1 of 1
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
03 March 2016 17:05
Re: Your complaint to the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
Dear Mr Jones
Thank you for your 2 March 2016 email.
The complaint does surround the Advisory Committee's handling of my judicial misconduct complaint.
I never received the letters which have been obtained from the Advisory Committee until you sent copies.
Neither did I receive the final case stated, which in the 16 September 2014 letter Mrs Watts, the Justices'
Clerk who handled the complaint (also Secretary to the Advisory Committee) stated was sent to me.
Moreover, I have still not been sent a copy, nor do I know when that document was sent. This is all tied in with
the Secretary to the Advisory Committee's handling of my judicial misconduct complaint.
As you will recall, the email I sent Mrs Watts on 25 February 2016, asked for the case stated to be re-sent and
to be informed of the original date it was served. The Justices' Clerk has not responded to the email which
raises the question, why, if the document exists and has been sent once would it be an issue to do so again.
The answer, in all probability lies in the fact that the final case stated has never been sent nor produced which
can also be said of the 16 September 2014, 29 May and 6 July 2015 letters. On the balance of probabilities,
these letters will have been produced in response to the investigation, which by your own admission took a
significant amount of time to obtain from the Advisory Committee.
I appreciate the Ombudsman will have as his highest priority for you to find a get out clause, but these are
issues that have arisen since the complaint was submitted in September 2014 which fall under the
Ombudsman's jurisdiction, and in any event, the issues preceding this were detailed in my complaint as
concerns, but which were never addressed. All the concerns I have raised are in relation to the handling (or
mishandling) of my complaint.
The Deputy Chairman of the Humber Advisory Committee, who is said to have dealt with the complaint,
dismissed it erroneously for the reasons I have previously stated, and as such this also falls under the
Ombudsman's remit.
Yours sincerely
X. Xxxxx
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:

07 March 2016 16:48
Transfer of your complaint to JACO Investigating Team
Dear Mr Xxxxx,
Further to our previous correspondence in relation to your concerns about the Advisory Committee's handling
of your complaint.
I am writing to inform you that your complaint has today been transferred to our Investigating Team for
consideration. Mr Nick Rose, Investigating Officer, will be in contact with you shortly.
Yours sincerely,
Adam Jones
JACO
05/06/2016

Ombudsman
Postal Area 9.53
th
9 Floor, The Tower
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
Our ref: 15-2489

Mr Xxxx Xxxxx
T 020 3334 2912
E nick.rose@jaco.gsi.gov.uk
xxxxxxxxxxxx@gmail.com
11 March 2016
Dear Mr Xxxxx

I am writing to inform you that I will be investigating your complaint to the
Ombudsman. I am also writing to ensure that you are aware of the limited scope of
the Ombudsmans powers. The Ombudsmans role, remit and powers, with regard to
judicial conduct matters are set out in sections 110-114 of the Constitutional Reform
Act 2005.
The Ombudsmans role is to consider complaints about the process by which
complaints about judicial office holders personal conduct have been dealt with. The
Ombudsman can consider whether prescribed procedures were complied with and
whether there was any maladministration in the original investigation. Section 111(5)
of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 enables him to set aside a decision if he
concludes that failures or maladministration in the investigative process make the
determination unsafe. However, the Ombudsman does not provide an appeal
mechanism and he cannot review the merits of judicial decisions, nor comment on
judicial actions or any other matter associated with the case.
I will write to you during April to advise how the matter is progressing.
Yours sincerely,
Nick Rose
Nick Rose
Investigating Officer

Ombudsman
Postal Area 9.53
th
9 Floor, The Tower
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
Our ref: 15-2489

Mr Xxxx Xxxxx
T 020 3334 2912
11 April 2016
Dear Mr Xxxxx

I am writing to inform you that I have now started my investigation of your complaint.
I will write a report and recommendations for the Ombudsman at the end of my
investigation. He will then consider the papers and make a decision on the case.
His draft report will be sent to the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice for
comment. At the end of this stage his report will be finalised and a copy sent to you.
I will write to you during May to advise how the matter is progressing.
Yours sincerely,
Nick Rose
Nick Rose
MrsAWatts
Justices'
Clerk for
HM Courts &
Tribunals Service
Ooncaster Magistrates'
PO Box 49
The Law Courts
College Road
OONCASTER
ON13HT

When calling please ask for: Judicial Support Unit
Direct I in' f11~n? ~A7~"l?
Court
20)
T: 01302 347303/304
E: SY&H-Secretariat@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk
Minicom
nt
VII: 01302 369066
www.justice.gov.uk
Grimsby
DN320QJ
Our ref: AW/CA
15 April 2016
Dear Mr ,.. ... _.~

Re: North East Lincolnshire Council V (\J-" .11:-
Grimsby and Cleethorpes Magistrates' Court
Application to State a Case
Further tJ your email correspondence of 25 February 2016 please find enclosed a further copy of
the final case which was originally issued to you under cover of correspondence dated 19
December 2013, and subsequently on 20 February 2014 and 1 May 2014.
You will note there have been a number of attempts to send you this correspondence and none
has been returned to this office as undelivered.
entry of the appeal together with a copy of the case.
, shall be grateful if you would kindly acknowledge receipt of this correspondence and enclosure.
Yours sincerely
MrsAWatts
Justices' Clerk
Encs

Ombudsman
Postal Area 9.53
th
9 Floor, The Tower
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
Our ref: 15-2489

Mr Xxxx Xxxxx
T 020 3334 2912
12 May 2016
Dear Mr Xxxxx

I am writing to update you on the progress of your complaint. I have contacted the
Advisory Committee to obtain further information and comment but have not received
a response. Today I sent a chase-up letter. Once I have this information I will be
able to complete my report and prepare the papers for the Ombudsman.
I will write to you next in June.
Yours sincerely,
Nick Rose
Nick Rose
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Attach:
Subject:
"Rose, Nicholas" <nick.rose@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>

"
"<
@gmail.com>
23 May 2016 15:25
- PI report 18.04.16 .doc;
- final IO Report v1 13.04.16.doc;
Emailing:
final letter
final.PDF
Mr
I attach the Ombudsman's preliminary investigation report and final letter in word and signed PDF
format.
If you have any questions in regard to these documents please do not hesitate to contact me.
Regards,
Nick Rose
Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
9th floor, The Tower, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ
0203 334 2912
nick.rose@jaco.gsi.gov.uk
08/01/2017
Complaint by Mr Xxxx Xxxxx - Ombudsmans Preliminary Investigation Report
JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS AND CONDUCT OMBUDSMANS PRELIMINARY

INVESTIGATION REPORT
COMPLAINT BY MR XXXX XXXXXX
Introduction
1.
Mr Xxxx Xxxxxx asked me to review the investigation by the Humber Advisory

Committee (HAC) of his complaint against Mr J A ONions JP and Mr T A
Shepherdson JP.
The complaint
2.
Mr Xxxxx complained to me on 8 August 2015. I have carried out a preliminary

investigation into his concerns that the HAC did not respond to his complaint: I
could not consider his complaint about the Courts failure to provide a case
stated response to his application for Judicial Review as this could not be dealt
with under the regulated disciplinary procedures and is therefore outside my
remit.
The background
3.
Mr Xxxxx faced a summons to appear at Grimsby Magistrates Court on 2

November 2012 for non-payment of Council Tax. He paid the outstanding tax
plus part of the costs demanded in the summons prior to the hearing. He was
concerned that on the date of the hearing the court made him liable for the
outstanding costs. He subsequently applied to Judicially Review this decision
and the matter appears to have been settled with the Council at that point. On 2
September 2014 Mr Xxxxx complained to the HAC about the magistrates
hearing his case. His complaint was dismissed on 16 September 2014 on the
grounds that he was complaining about a judicial decision which did not raise a
question of misconduct. Mr Xxxxx did not receive the letter and subsequently
complained about this to the Judicial Office and the JCIO.
My decision
4.
I have not identified any issue arising in my preliminary investigation which could
lead to a finding of maladministration. I consider that the error in the post code
of the dismissal letter of 2 September 2015 should not have prevented it from
being delivered, as the whole of the postal address was correctly set out, and if it
was undelivered it should have been returned to the HAC for further action and
re-issue. This minor error could not in itself amount to maladministration. I note
that the HAC re-issued the dismissal letter on two further occasions but that
Complaint by Mr Xxxx Xxxxx - Ombudsmans Preliminary Investigation Report

there is no proof of postage as the letter was sent by standard post. It is
unfortunate that the HAC did not email a copy to Mr Xxxxxx when it posted a
copy of the letter, but again this omission could not amount to maladministration.
I am content that Mr Xxxxxs complaint of 2 September 2014 was properly
dismissed in accordance with disciplinary legislation and guidance. For these
reasons I cannot accept this complaint for a full investigation
Paul Kernaghan CBE

23 May 2016
Annex A
JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS AND CONDUCT OMBUDSMANS OFFICE
COMPLAINT BY MR XXXX YYYYYY
INVESTIGATING OFFICERS REPORT
INTRODUCTION
1. This report is prepared following a request by Mr Xxxx Yyyyyy, that the Judicial
Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman review the conduct of an
investigation by the Humber Advisory Committee (HAC) of his complaint
against Mr JA ONions JP and Mr T A Shepherdson JP. This report will form
part of the evidence considered by the Ombudsman in assessing the
complaint.
BACKGROUND
2. The papers I have seen indicate that Mr Yyyyyy faced a summons to appear at
Grimsby Magistrates Court on 2 November 2012 for non-payment of Council
Tax. He paid the outstanding tax plus part of the costs demanded in the
summons prior to the hearing. He was concerned that on the date of the
hearing the court made him liable for the outstanding costs. He subsequently
applied to Judicially Review this decision and the matter appears to have been
settled with the Council at that point. On 2 September 2014 Mr Yyyyyy
complained to the HAC about the magistrates hearing his case. His complaint
was dismissed on 16 September 2014 on the grounds that he was
complaining about a judicial decision which did not raise a question of
misconduct. Mr Yyyyy did not receive the letter and subsequently complained
about this to Judicial Office, the JCIO and to you.
THE COMPLAINT
3. Mr Yyyyyy contacted the Ombudsmans Office on 8 August 2015 and made
final comments on 3 March 2016. The Ombudsman has agreed to investigate
the concerns that: the HAC failed to properly respond to his complaint or his
correspondence and dismissed the complaint erroneously.
4. Mr Yyyyyy asked the Ombudsman to investigate his concern that the court had
not properly responded to his application for Judicial Review and had not
provided a case stated document. The complaint about the Courts handling
of the Judicial Review application would be outside the Ombudsmans remit as
it does not concern a matter which could be considered under the disciplinary
legislation as it does not concern the actions of a judicial office-holder. The
Ombudsman cannot therefore consider it within the powers granted to him
under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.
MY OBSERVATIONS
The complaint to the Advisory Committee
5. On 2 September 2014 Mr Yyyyyy complained to the Central Secretarial Office
in Doncaster that
Investigating Officers Report - Complaint from Mr Xxxx Yyyyyy
two Magistrates, Mr ONions and Mr Shepherdson had adjudicated on his

case and allowed the local authority to enforce payment of an unpaid
element of his court summons costs; and that
his application was subsequently submitted to the Magistrates Court to
state a case in his appeal to the High Court, he believed the failure to
respond to this request was a failing in the Magistrates behaviour which
he described as conduct [which] has been such to pervert the course of
justice.
6. Mr Yyyyyy attached an affidavit to his complaint which he had produced for his
application for Judicial Review, this document set out a chronology of the
events surrounding the hearing of his case; it also set out his attempts to
obtain a response to his application from the court. The papers show that the
application was not proceeded with as the local authority responded with an
offer acceptable to Mr Yyyyyy.
The Advisory Committees handling of the complaint
7. On 16 September 2014 the HAC responded, stating that the Chairman had
dismissed both aspects of his complaint because:
first, the complaint related to a judicial decision which did not raise a
question of misconduct and
second, the complaint about correspondence in his legal proceedings
concerned actions which were not done or caused to be done by the
Magistrates.
8. I observe that the disciplinary rules state that:
The Chairman of the Advisory Committee or the Advisory Committee
must dismiss a complaint, or part of a complaint, if it falls into any of
the following categories: 32(b) it is about a judicial decision or judicial
case management, and raises no question of misconduct; and 32(c)
the action complained of was not done or caused to be done by a
magistrate.
9. I also observe that first tier complaints bodies such as the HAC do not have
the power to investigate complaints about criminal behaviour such as
perverting the course of justice this is a matter for police action if appropriate.
10. The response was sent to Mr Yyyyyy but did not reach him. I observe that the
postal address was correctly stated on the letter but that the postcode was
written as DN32 0Q3 rather than DN32 0QJ.
11. Having not received the response, Mr Yyyyyy emailed the Judicial Office HR
Team at the Royal Courts of Justice on 14 May 2015 to complain. His
complaint was forwarded to the HAC which sent another copy of the dismissal
letter to him on 29 May 2015; unfortunately this letter did not reach him (it had
the same error in the postcode but was otherwise correctly addressed). I
observe that the HAC did not email a copy of the letter to Mr Yyyyyy.
12. On 25 June 2015 Mr Yyyyyy emailed the Judicial Complaints Investigations
Office (JCIO) to complain that his complaint had been ignored by the
Secretary of the HAC. The JCIO forwarded the email to the HAC on 29 June
2015.
13. On 16 July 2015 the HAC sent another copy of the dismissal letter to him,
unfortunately this letter did not reach him (it had the same error in the
postcode but was otherwise correctly addressed). I observe that the HAC did
not email a copy of the letter to Mr Yyyyyy.
14. Mr Yyyyyy then complained to the Ombudsman.
15. I asked the HAC to ask if it had a record of postage of the letters; it responded:
A log is not maintained of post that is sent out by the Advisory
Committee. Correspondence that for any reason is despatched by
recorded delivery will of course have proof of posting.
Correspondence of the description sent to Mr Yyyyyy is issued by
ordinary post and will be despatched on the date of the
correspondence or exceptionally the next working day if for some
reason the mail does not reach the collection by Royal Mail from the
court office in time.
16. The Ombudsman will consider whether there is any maladministration in the
handling of Mr Yyyyyys complaint and his correspondence.
17. The Judicial Conduct (Magistrates) Rules 2014 state that:
Making a complaint about judicial misconduct
9. A complaint must be made to the local Advisory Committee or its
Secretary.
10. A complaint must contain an allegation of misconduct
Consideration of complaint
24. The Chairman of the Advisory Committee must initially consider whether
an allegation of misconduct has been made by a complainant.
25. If not, they may refer the matter to the Bench Chairman to deal with as a
pastoral or training matter.
26. Otherwise, the Chairman of the Advisory Committee must
(a) decide what action to take under rule 31; or
(b) refer the complaint to the Advisory Committee to decide what action to
take under rule
Dismissal of complaint
32. The Chairman of the Advisory Committee or the Advisory Committee
must dismiss a complaint, or part of a complaint, if it falls into any of the
following categories
(a) it does not adequately particularise the matter complained of;
(b) it is about a judicial decision or judicial case management, and raises no
question of misconduct;
(c) the action complained of was not done or caused to be done by a
magistrate;
(d) it is vexatious;
(e) it is without substance;
(f) even if true, it would not require any disciplinary action to be taken;
(g) it is untrue, mistaken or misconceived;
(h) it raises a matter which has already been dealt with, whether under these
Rules or
otherwise, and does not present any material new evidence;
(i) it is about a person who is no longer a magistrate;
(j) it is about the private life of a magistrate and could not reasonably be
considered to affect
their suitability to hold their judicial office;
(k) it is about the professional conduct in a non-judicial capacity of a
magistrate and could
not reasonably be considered to affect their suitability to hold judicial office;
(l) for any other reason it does not relate to misconduct by a magistrate.
Guidance
Rule 9: An Advisory Committee may only consider a complaint that contains
an allegation of personal misconduct by a magistrate. Misconduct is not
defined in the rules. The OED definition is Instances of unacceptable or
improper conduct or behaviour. In the context of the rules personal
misconduct relates to the magistrates behaviour for example: a magistrate
shouting or speaking in a sarcastic manner in court; or misuse of judicial
status outside of court. Personal misconduct does not relate to how the judge
has managed a case or hearing or, to any decisions or judgments made in
the course of court proceedings. The only way to challenge such matters is
through the appellate process. The Directions for Bench Chairmen, the
declaration and undertaking signed by magistrates and the Guide to Judicial
Conduct are a useful point of reference on determining whether a matter may
be one of potential misconduct. Where a complaint does not contain an
allegation of misconduct the Advisory Committee will advise the complainant
that it cannot investigate the complaint under these rules and will inform the
complainant of the reasons for rejection. Where a rejected complaint raises
issues that may need to be addressed through training or informal guidance,
the Advisory Committee Chairman may refer the complaint to the Bench
Training and Development Committee or to the Bench Chairman to deal with
as part of his pastoral responsibilities.
Rule 32 (a) A complaint must set out all the details required under rule 12 and
provide specific details about the alleged misconduct. For example a
complaint which simply states that a magistrate was rude is not adequately
particularised. In this
example the complainant should say what the magistrate said or did to cause
the complainant to believe that the magistrate was behaving inappropriately
and at which part of the hearing this occurred.
Rule 32 (b) The constitutional independence of the judiciary means that
decisions made by a judicial office holder during the course of proceedings
are made without the interference of ministers, officials or other judicial office
holders (unless they are considering the matter whilst sitting in their judicial
capacity, for example, in an appeal hearing). Judicial decisions include, but
are not limited to, the way in which proceedings are managed, disclosure of
documents, which evidence should be heard and the judgment or sentence
given. However, the manner in which the justice conducted themselves can
amount to misconduct, for example if the justice was rude or abusive or failed
to exercise a fundamental responsibility such as a failure to accept the
decision of the majority of the bench or falling asleep on the bench.
Nick Rose
2016

Ombudsman
Postal Area 953
9th Floor, The Tower
102 Petty France
London SW 1H 9 AJ
OX 152380 Westminster 8
T 020 3334 2900
E headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk
wW\f.J.judiciafombudsman.gov.uk
23 May 2016
Dear Mr
Your complaint
Thank you for your correspondence
complaint.
with my officers setting out your concerns about your
I asked Mr Rose to consider this matter; as you are aware his letter indicated that I would
conduct a full investigation, including referring my report to the Lord Chancellor and the Lord
Chief Justice. However I have since discussed the matter with him and concluded that your
complaint does not raise issues which could enable me to make a finding of
maladministration.
I am therefore afraid that I must refuse to accept your complaint for a full investigation. You
will see from the accompanying reports that I was content that the Humber Advisory
Committee properly considered and dismissed your complaint on 2 September 2014, in
accordance with the relevant legislation and guidance.
The fact that three letters did not reach you is surprising as they were properly addressed
except for a minor error in the postcode which should not have prevented delivery. I do not
consider that a finding of maladministration is possible for this error.
Concerns that you raise about the Court's response to your application for Judicial Review do
not fall within the scope of the disciplinary process and were properly dismissed by the
Humber Advisory Committee in accordance with legislation and guidance. The Court's
response to your application for Judicial Review is outside my remit and I cannot comment
further on that issue ..
I appreciate that you will be disappointed that I have not been able to accept your complaint
for a full investigatioJ':}, but I can assure you that I did consider the matter most carefully before
reaching my d~io9ft.
~
Yours sin<;e'reJy;'
/.
,t/
//
l?/'
,-1
t"
r-".
.,
-'''i
~=
.~~~~-
r/, ~.
~7
lPaufKernaghan CBE
....-
Page 1 of 2
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
24 May 2016 12:52
Re: Emailing: Xxxxx final letter
Dear Mr Rose
Further to my 24 May 2016 email, I have noted that the events are inaccurate regarding the proceedings, for
example there seems to have been confusion regarding the the two High Court applications. The first was an
application for the justices to state a case for the opinion of the High Court and the second (Judicial Review
claim) was for a mandatory order requiring the Justices to state a case for an appeal to the High Court as I
was having no success dealing directly with the Magistrates court.
For the moment I will leave that to one side except to say that I'm concerned about how it has come about
that you have been led to believe that there was some settlement with North East Lincolnshire Council, hence
(para 2):
"He subsequently applied to Judicially Review this decision and the matter appears to have been
settled with the Council at that point."
And (para 6)
"The papers show that the application was not proceeded with as the local authority responded with an
offer acceptable to Mr Xxxxx."
I would like to know what information has been referred to in order to assert the above because there has
never been any kind of settlement with North East Lincolnshire Council in the matter.
Letters produced in response to the investigation
There is no obvious reason why the three documents which were allegedly sent to me dated 16 September
2014, 29 May and 6 July 2015 could not have been made available for the Ombudsman within a few days,
yet Mr Jones who was initially dealing with the matter stated the following in his 23 February 2016
correspondence:
"It took a significant amount of time to obtain the complaint file from the Advisory Committee, which
was received last week."
I have checked my records and note that Mr Jones wrote to me on 3 December 2015 and from the contents of
his email it was implied that it was on or around that date when these documents were asked for:
"I will now request your complaint file from the JCIO and you will be written to again when it has been
received and considered."
To take over 12 weeks to disclose the documents does tend to suggest what I believe has happened which is
they have been produced purposely for the Ombudsman's investigation. This would be supported by the fact
that the final case stated, which is said in the 16 September 2014 letter by the Justices' Clerk who handled the
complaint was sent to me has apparently never been seen by anyone. Presumably the Ombudsman has not
at any time been furnished with the document and I definitely have not despite requesting or enquiring about it
on the following occasions:
1. An email to the Justices' Clerk on 25 February 2016, (Mr Jones JACO copied in).
I was never sent a response.
2. A request to the Ministry of Justice on 13 March 2016 regarding the 25 February email.
17/06/2016
Page 2 of 2
I received the following

"I have spoken to Ms Watts and she apologises for the delay in response and for not arranging for you
to be updated with the fact that she is dealing with your email. Ms Watts has confirmed that she will
respond to your email of 25 February by no later than 15 April 2016. Ms Watts has been considering
this matter and has had to review the file to give full consideration to the matter raised."
I was not sent a response by or on 15 April 2016 nor have I received one since.
3. Prompted the Ministry of Justice on 11 May 2016.

I was emailed on 12 May by the MoJ as follows: "I will contact Ms Watts again and ask her to respond."
Still no reply or even acknowledgement.
It is also material that the Court was contacted nine times in connection with obtaining the finalised case
stated and replied only once, despite the Ombudsman stating that the mishandling of the application does not
come under his remit. The fact that I was written to on that one occasion (6 March 2014) with an
undertaking that by the following day, the position regarding the case would be set out and communicated in
writing fits in with the pattern, as that too was never acted on.
A letter updating me on the progress of my complaint, sent 12 May 2016 provides further evidence of the
difficulty there seems to be for the Advisory Committee to provide information. Delaying continues to be the
recurring theme:
"I am writing to update you on the progress of your complaint. I have contacted the Advisory
Committee to obtain further information and comment but have not received a response. Today I sent a
chase-up letter. Once I have this information I will be able to complete my report and prepare the
papers for the Ombudsman."
The odds are virtually nil that four items of correspondence correctly addressed, all but a minor error being
sent that neither reached me nor were returned. I have stated that none of the correspondence reached me
and am prepared to declare so in a signed statement of truth.
I would think the most sensible way forward before a final report is produced is for the relevant person at
the Advisory Committee to make a written statement of truth that the documents said to have been sent to me
on the respective dates were actually produced and sent around that time.
Yours sincerely
X. Xxxxx
17/06/2016
Page 1 of 1
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:

24 May 2016 15:07
RE: Emailing: Xxxxx final letter
Mr Xxxxx
Thank you for your comments, I am happy to respond to the points you raise.
Para 2 of the Report - You confirm that the 'case stated' related to a separate claim and not the JR - thank
you for clarifying this. This is not something that would affect the outcome of the decision as the Ombudsman
confirmed in Para 2 that correspondence about the 'case stated' was not a matter that could be considered
under the regulated disciplinary process. Your proceedings and correspondence with the court about these
proceedings did not raise an issue which could be considered by the AC or the Ombudsman.
Your papers appeared to suggest that the JR did not proceed because the Council had declined to pursue the
costs against you (see Para 32 and 38 of your chronology). You have now clarified that this was not the case
- again this has no bearing on the Ombudsman's decision as he has already stated that correspondence
about a 'case stated' was outside the scope of the regulated disciplinary procedures.
Delay by the AC in providing a copy of its complaint file - the AC stated that the delay in responding to a
request for the complaint file was caused by an office move. There was a further delay when I asked the AC
if it had proof of posting for the three letters. It finally confirmed that the letters would have been sent by
standard delivery and that there was no record of posting for this type of mail. JACO provided regular
updates to you during this period.
The complaint file did not contain the letter of 16/09/14 or correspondence with the MoJ because this was not
a matter dealt with by the AC as it was outside the disciplinary process. Again the Ombudsman was clear that
issues around the case stated were not matters he could consider, he cannot consider any issue arising in
your correspondence with the court regarding your claim or your application for JR. He confirmed in his report
that the AC properly dismissed your judicial conduct complaint in accordance with the legislation. Other
matters you raised were outside the AC's investigative remit.
I trust that the 3 letters have now reached you. You will have to chase your contact in the MoJ about the 4th
letter. The Ombudsman's preliminary investigation report is final and there will be no further 'final' reports; the
complaint process has been completed and no further action will be taken by the Ombudsman as he has
confirmed that the actions complained about could not lead to a finding of maladministration because the AC
correctly dismissed your original complaint in accordance with the disciplinary legislation.
I trust this clarifies matters and concludes the complaint.
Nick Rose
Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
9th floor, The Tower, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ
0203 334 2912
nick.rose@jaco.gsi.gov.uk
18/06/2016
Page 1 of 2
Xxx
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
27 May 2016 21:31
Re: Emailing: Xxxxx final letter
Dear Mr Rose
My suspicions are now confirmed that the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman is an organisation
put in place at the expense of the taxpayer to give the appearance that holders of judicial office are
accountable. It takes little concluding that legislation governing investigatory powers has been enacted to
enable its application to cases with such flexibility that the same complaint could either fall within the
Ombudsman's remit and be accepted for investigation or be considered outside his remit and be rejected.
The statutory nature of the process serves as protection for judicial office-holders as invariably the
Ombudsman will apply the law in a way that ensures the matter falls outside the Ombudsman's remit.
Presumably, only when the MoJ wishes to be rid of someone will the governing legislation be applied as a
means to that end.
The Ombudsman has decided the outcome purely on the basis that he believes the Advisory Committee's
version of events when the overwhelming evidence is that the letters have been produced afterwards and in
response to preliminary enquiries.
From the Ombudsman statement at paragraph 4 of his decision the matter is narrowed down to such triviality
as to decide whether he considers the alleged letters containing a minor error in the post code constitutes
maladministration, which of course it wouldn't but is not the issue.
The deliberate postcode error was an obvious and half-hearted attempt at a red herring, but did serve as
something on which the Ombudsman could base his report. It should be noted that other correspondence
sent by the Justices' Clerk, properly addressed, have been received both before and after the alleged letters
were sent.
I doubt the Ombudsman disagreed with my assertion that the odds of four items of correspondence failing to
be delivered are virtually zero. If he doesn't the matter effectively comes down to being my word against the
relevant person at the Advisory Committee's. I have stated that none of the correspondence reached me and
prepared to declare so in a signed statement of truth and suggest that the relevant person at the Advisory
Committee does similar. However, this proposal has been ignored and believe it has been because
discovering the truth might not fit in with the Ombudsman's agenda.
Further inaccuracies
It might seem trivial but there should be at least a minimum standard to which the Ombudsman should aim
with regard accuracy of reports.
At paragraph 4 of the decision, the dismissal letter referred to was not the letter of 2 September 2015, that
was the date of my letter of complaint to the Advisory Committee.
In your email (24 May) it is stated that the complaint file did not contain the letter of 16/09/14. My
understanding is that this was in the complaint file as it was one of three letters sent to me as email
attachments on 23/02/16. That email stated as follows:
"I am sorry for the delay in writing to you. It took a significant amount of time to obtain the complaint file
from the Advisory Committee, which was received last week."
While checking my records today to confirm this I also looked into when the letters were created which were
as follows:
Letter 16.9.14 Created on 08/02/16 at 18:20:11
18/06/2016
Page 2 of 2

Whether or not the fact they were produced two weeks before you sent them to me has any significance I will
let you decide.
Case stated document and MoJ correspondence

I assume you meant the case stated document when referring in your email (24 May) to the complaint file not
containing the letter of 16/09/14.
The final 'case stated' referred to in the 16/09/14 letter is a key piece of evidence that should have been
obtained. The Ombudsman should have insisted on its disclosure whether or not it was part of the
complaint file. Where events are questioned the Ombudsman must be required to make a reasonable attempt
to get at the truth. That could have been done simply by asking for the disputed document as it supposedly
exists as stated in the recently obtained dismissal letter of 16/09/14:
"A certificate of refusal to state a case was not issued by the Justices because they did state a case for
the consideration of the Administrative Court and the final case has been sent to you."
The complaint file clearly should have contained the final 'case stated', but it is immaterial that the
Ombudsman disagrees. Discovering it did not exist, therefore not sent would provide a solution for why the
three other letters had similarly not existed. Merely requiring proof that the case stated existed to further an
investigation does not amount to considering issues surrounding the document.
For the same reasons stated for being unable to consider the MoJ correspondence, i.e., that it was not part of
the complaint file and not dealt with by the Advisory Committee, it does not amount to considering issues
around the 'case stated', only reinforces the assertion of maladministration by the failure to reply after
undertaking to do so by a given date.
It is clear from the chronology (para 47) that a certificate of refusal to state a case was requested on 22/04/14
and if as is said in the dismissal letter of 16/09/14, the final case had been sent to me, then you would have
expected this would have been advised.
It is my belief that the Ombudsman, knowing full well I have been caused gross injustice by these events, has
unfairly applied the law in a way that ensures the matter falls outside his jurisdiction in a bid to protect the
responsible person.
It would be reasonable, given these arguments, that this matter be reconsidered, however, I expect you will
counter this by informing me that I have the option of challenging the decision by entering into another
procedure that has been responsible for causing me the injustice in the first place.
Your sincerely
X. Xxxxx
18/06/2016
Complaints, Correspondence and Litigation Team

1st Floor, Post Point 1.4
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
XX Xxxxxx Xxxx
Grimsby
DNXX XXX
25 June 2016
Dear Sir/Madam
Re: Failure responding to correspondence regarding delivery of case stated

I understand my complaint should in the first instance be made to the Court Manager; however, the
concerns I wish to raise have been ongoing since November 2012 and relate to the court failing to
reply, so consider it valid that it is escalated now to the Complaints Handling Team. The complaint
surrounds a disputed order made against me by Justices at Grimsby Magistrates court which led
to an application to the court to state a case for an appeal to the high court.
I have been unable to obtain the case stated, despite making numerous attempts. It is this failure
that has prevented the appeal that was instituted on 22 November 2012 from proceeding to the
High Court to this day.
The injustice caused extends far beyond that set out in this complaint and so consider it just
preliminary information to get an investigation underway. It is intended, on agreement with the
team to forward details of the issues that have arisen as a result of the gross failure to enable a
comprehensive investigation to be carried out.
Those issues predominantly concern North East Lincolnshire Council misallocating payment to the
sum subject to appeal when payment was clearly intended for the years council tax account which
was current when paid. As the council has been able to engineer payment arrears this has led to
recovery being taken through the court each year since with further costs added in the most recent
proceedings. That in turn has led to time consuming and fruitless disputes i.e., formal complaints,
escalation of issues to the LGO, police, police appeals and entering into a private prosecution
against the police for negligence by improperly exercising police powers under Section 26 of the
Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.
The issues, as far as those directly relating to HMCTS are evident from the correspondence
compiled chronologically appended to this letter, which is referable to the draft document
(chronology) prepared for, and intended to be part of the High Court papers for the case stated
appeal.
It will be evident on reading the account that the cause of the gross injustice which has protracted
so far over roughly three and a half years has been the unwillingness and refusal of the court to
cooperate, which in some cases has involved more seriously lying.
Key points
Initial delay
There was no contact made when the Deputy Justices Clerk who was initially dealing with the
application left HMCTS toward the end of 2012. After several weeks having no update, enquiries
were made to find out why there was no progress being made and it was only on this prompt that I
was made aware that the Deputy Justices Clerk was no longer employed by HMCTS.
Unnecessary Claim for mandatory order
The failure to deal with queries about the recognizance which the Magistrates set at 500 resulted
in gross injustice as I had to research judicial review procedures (mandatory order) as it was not
reasonable that I appoint a legal professional. It was only by doing this and when the judicial
review claim was underway that the Magistrates' Court admitted in the Acknowledgement of
Service that the question of the appropriateness of the recognizance and/or the amount could
have been considered by the court. Simply answering my correspondence would have meant
making the claim for judicial review was not necessary.
Unanswered correspondence to obtain final case
Various correspondence going unanswered from 19 August 2013 when representations were
made on the draft case, up until the Justices' Clerk finally made contact on 6 March 2014 stating
that either that day or the following the position regarding the case (advising on the next steps)
would be set out in writing. Even with that undertaking there was no communication advising on
the next steps. Subsequent attempts to find out what was happening elicited no response.
A letter sent 22 April 2014 requested the production of a Certificate of refusal to state a case under
section 111(5) of the Magistrates Court's Act 1980 but was never answered, neither was an email
sent 9 July 2014 to enquire into whether HMCTS had any arrangements in place to restrict my
contact with the court.
Judicial complaint to Humber Advisory Committee
Having no response until 23 February 2016 to a judicial complaint dated 2 September 2014 to the
Advisory Committee which was obtained only after engaging the Judicial Conduct Ombudsman. It
is claimed that the matter was dealt with on 16 September 2014 and stated that a Certificate of
refusal to state a case was not issued by the Justices because the final case was sent to me.
Despite this, a copy which has been requested has not been sent nor has the Justices Clerks
undertaking to inform me of the matter by 15 April 2016 been acted on.
Yours sincerely
X. Xxxxx
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"HMCTS Customer Service (Correspondence)" <ComplaintsCorres&LT@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>

"
"<
@gmail.com>
29 June 2016 12:17
: Complaint - Grimsby Magistrate's court
Dear Mr
Thank you for your email.
I have forwarded your complaint to the Cluster Manager and Justices' Clerk and asked them to respond to
you direct in line with HM Courts & Tribunals complaints procedure. Our team are only able to consider
complaints at the 3rd stage of our complaints process. I appreciate that you have previously contacted the
court but I must ensure they have an opportunity to respond to your complaint.
Further information on the complaints procedure can be found in the complaints leaflet 'EX343 - Unhappy with
our service - what can you do?' :
http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/HMCTS/GetLeaflet.do?court_leaflets_id=2781
Kind regards
Karen Warner | HM Courts & Tribunals Service | Customer Directorate
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"NE RSU FOI & DPA" <NERSUFOI&DPA@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>

<
@gmail.com>
08 July 2016 15:04
Complaint - Grimsby Magistrate's court
Dear Sir,
Your complaint has been forwarded by the Customer Service Team to Ms Watts, Justices
Clerk for Humber & South Yorkshire to respond to directly.
Yours sincerely
K Smith
K Smith
NE Region KILO
NE Delivery Directors Office,
Level 5 | Leeds Magistrates Court & Family Hearing Centre | PO Box 97 | Westgate | Leeds | LS1 3JP | DX:
743892 Leeds (Westgate)
08/01/2017
HM Courts &
Tribunals Service
MrsAWatts
Justices' Clerk for
Ooncaster Justice Centre South
College Road
Doncaster
ON13HS
OX 703001 Ooncaster 5

T: 01302 308300
E: SY&H-Secretariat@hmcts.qsLgov.uk
www.Justice.gov.uk
nt
Gifmsoy- -----North East Lincolnshire
DN320QJ
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.
Cont!
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.
Unanswered
Correspondence
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.
Judicial
Complaint to Humber Advisory
Committee
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.
Cont!
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
LevelS
Leeds Magistrates Court & Family Hearing Centre
PO Box 97
Westgate
Leeds
LS13JP
Yours sincerely
MrsAWatts
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
NERSUFOI&DPA@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
13 October 2016 17:55
For the Attention of Ms K Smith
Dear Ms Smith
I write in connection with a complaint I submitted on 25 June 2016 concerning Grimsby Magistrates' court,
which I understand was forwarded by the Customer Service Team to Ms Watts, Justices Clerk for Humber &
South Yorks to respond to on 8 July 2016.
There is an obvious conflict of interest having Ms Watts, about whom the complaint concerns deal with the
matter herself and it is believed likely that the complaint will be improperly dealt with and would not be
surprised if a response is never sent at all. The complaint in actual fact concerns such a scenario. I will not
elaborate here as the whole matter is documented in the complaint.
I sense that this impossible situation is failing to be addressed because the Justices Clerk is being able to
contain the issues and stop them reaching a more senior level within HMCTS where they would hopefully be
investigated.
I would appreciate that this is escalated to someone who has the authority to effectively deal with my
concerns.
Yours sincerely
.
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:

"
"<
@gmail.com>
14 October 2016 16:26
RE: For the Attention of Ms K Smith
Dear Mr
thank you for your email.

I am out of the office until Wednesday of next week but have appraised my Manager of the
situation and the papers.
Please be assured that I will respond to you and update you regularly
Yours sincerely
K Smith
Mrs K Smith
NE Region KILO
09/01/2017
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
17 November 2016 16:11
Re:
Dear Ms Warner
I have not had any response from the Justices' Clerk, Alison Watts, regarding the complaint I sent on 25 June
2016. This comes at no surprise given her track-record in these matters.
Could you please advise on the appropriate action to take because the chances of this matter ever being
addressed whilst the Justices' Clerk herself is responsible for investigating is zero as far as I'm concerned.
Yours sincerely
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
24 November 2016 11:35
Fw:
Dear Sir/Madam
Re: Grimsby Magistrates' court Complaint - 25 June 2016
I would like acknowledgement of the email I sent on 17 November 2016 and confirmation that my complaint is
being looked into.
Yours sincerely
.
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:

"
"<
@gmail.com>
25 November 2016 14:42
RE:
Dear Mr
Thank you for your email of 24 November. I am sorry that you did not get an acknowledgment of
your email of 17 November. I can confirm that we received it and have asked the court to respond to
your complaint.
Yours sincerely
Anisul Haque
Customer Investigations Officer | Customer Investigations Team
09/01/2017
HM Courts &
Tribunals Service
MrsAWatts
Justices' Clerk for
Ooncaster Justice Centre South
College Road
Ooncaster
ON13HS
OX 703001 Ooncaster 5

Direct Line: 01302 308300
T: 01302 308300
E: SY&H-Secretariat@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
www.justice.gov.uk
28 November 2016
Mrf
-----Unmsoy
DN320QJ
Dear Mr f':.': _
~-
I have been contacted by Customer Service who have forwarded to me your message of 17
November 2016.
Please find enclosed a copy of my letter to you dated 22 July 2016.
Yours sincerely
~
MrsAWatts
Justices' Clerk
Enc
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
08 December 2016 10:35
Re:
Dear Anisul Haque

You will be aware from previous emails that my complaint has been with the Justices' Clerk, Alison Watts, for
approaching 6 months and have not yet received any indication that an investigation is underway.
I have discussed the matter with a caseworker at the Parliamentary Ombudsman yesterday and have been
advised to contact my MP to request that the Ombudsman intervene. However, before I do so I need to allow
HMCTS another opportunity to provide a response within a reasonable time frame and so formally asking that
a date is given by which I can expect the outcome.
Yours sincerely
.
10/01/2017
filE
COpy
HM Courts &
Tribunals Service
MrsAWatts
Justices' Clerk for
Doncaster Justice Centre South
College Road
Doncaster
DN13HS
OX 703001 Doncaster 5

T: 01302 308300
E: SY&H-Secretariat@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
www.justice.gov.uk
Mri
--Grlmsoy- - -- ---North East Lincolnshire
DN320QJ
Our ref: AW/CA
13 December 2016
Dear Mr ,.. ... _.,

I have been referred your message of 21 November directed to the Customer Service Unit in
which you ask the question:
"What formal route of complaint is available if you are unhappy with how a case has been handles
by a judge?"
I note in your message that you have already received information from the Ministry of Justice on
14 November 2016 in this regard.
To add to the advice that has already been tendered to you:1. Dependent upon where the proceedings in question have reached, it is possible that you may
be able to seek a Judicial Review of the way in which a judge has exercised his case
management powers in the case in question. You may wish to consider taking your own
independent legal advice before pursuing this course of action.
2. There is no doubt that the Judicial Conduct and Investigations Office may not consider
concerns about the way in which a judge exercises his/her judicial discretion in the application
of case management powers in a particular case. However, if the are concerns about the
manner in which the judge exercises those powers, ie the behaviours of the judge if it could be
said to go beyond the robustness a case deserves, eg being rude, then a complaint may
possible be considered and as such could be referred to the Judicial Conduct and
Investigations Office.
3.
If the way in which a case has been handled by a judge has resulted in a decision of the court
about which an affected person (ie defendant or party to the proceedings) is aggrieved, then
that person should pursue the line of appeal available for the type of proceedings in question,
eg Crown Court, High Court, etc.
I hope that the foregoing is of assistance to you.

Yours sincerely
Mrs A Watts
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
<melanie.onn.mp@parliament.uk>
20 December 2016 16:53
HM Courts & Tribunal Service Customer Investigations Team
Dear Melanie Onn

Re: HM Courts & Tribunal Service Customer Investigations Team
I have discussed my concerns with the Parliamentary Ombudsman (7 December) about a failure to get a
response to a complaint formally submitted to HM Courts & Tribunal Service. The caseworker advised I
contact you to request that the Ombudsman intervene if the court continues to be uncooperative.
As set out in my December 8 correspondence below I have given the Customer Investigations Team further
opportunity to respond which the service has not taken.
The difficulty probably arises in the fact that the Investigations Team referred the complaint to the person
whom my complaint concerns.
I would appreciated if you would ask the Ombudsman to intervene. The caseworker who I have
communicated with on this matter is Mr Ian Conroy who can be contacted on telephone number: 0300 061
4609 and email: ian.conroy@ombudsman.org.uk
Yours sincerely
10/01/2017
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Sent:
Attach:
Subject:

"
"<
@gmail.com>
03 January 2017 08:43
Mr
- Letter 13.12.16.pdf; Mr
- Letter 28.11.16.pdf;
Final Case.pdf; Mr
- Letter
19.12.13.pdf; Mr
- Letter 20.2.14.pdf
Complaint submitted 25 June 2016
Dear Mr
Please find enclosed herewith responses sent to yourself by post in respect of your complaint sent to the
Customer Service Unit on 25 June 2016, the first response was posted on 22 July 2016.
As you will see further letters were sent to you on 28 November 2016 and 13 December 2016 by post to the
address below. At no time has any correspondence been returned to the sender by Royal Mail.
Mr
Grimsby
DN32
I also enclose herewith a copy of the letters sent (again by post) to the above address on 19 December 2013,
20 February 2014, 1 May 2014 and 15 April 2016 and the "case stated" document.
Can I ask would your preference for any future communications be sent solely by way of email, to ensure
delivery?
Your email of 13 October to myself and the issues you raise has been reviewed at this office by both the Head
of the Regional Support Unit and the Delivery Director for the North East Region, and please be assured that
the Delivery Director is fully appraised of the situation.
If you remain dissatisfied with Ms Watts' reply of 22 July 2016, then you may of course request a review of the
reply by the Cluster Manager for Humber & South Yorkshire. Any review must follow the complaint escalation
procedure as you did with the response to your complaint dated 11 August 2016.
Yours sincerely
K Smith
K Smith
NE Region KILO
Tel: 0113 2511200
10/01/2017
Page 1 of 1
From:
To:
Cc:
Sent:
Subject:
"
"<
@gmail.com>
"Maione, Tony" <Tony.Maione@Nelincs.gov.uk>; <Alison.Watts@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>
05 January 2017 13:29
Re: Complaint submitted 25 June 2016
Dear Ms Smith
Thank you for your 3 January 2017 response and attachments.
I can confirm that none of the letters, stated to have been sent, have been delivered to me. The first time I
have seen copies of them was 3 January 2017.
I had been informed on 23 February 2016 that the final case had been sent to me but unaware that the date it
was sent was 19 December 2013 until seeing a copy of the cover letter on 3 January 2017.
The number of undelivered items sent by post which I'm now aware of in this matter totals 11, therefore, I
would prefer future correspondence to be sent by email as you suggest.
I fully anticipate escalating my complaint to the next stage but my priority is lodging the application with the
Administrative Office at the Royal Courts of Justice and therefore ask that a signed copy of the final case is
sent to me to enable this (the copy I have is unsigned and marked "office copy").
It has been confirmed by North East Lincolnshire Council that it holds no record of the final case and suggest
that a signed copy is also served on the Council in accordance with Part 35 of the Criminal Procedure Rules
2015 (35.3 sub-paragraph 9).
Yours sincerely
10/01/2017

Case Stated Application Missing Docs

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Case Stated Application Missing Docs

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Justices' Clerk for Humber & South

Dear Mrs Watts

OX: 742840 (Doncaster

VII: 01302 369066

Our ref: AW/CA

I acknowledge receipt of your representations upon the draft case.

Justices' Clerk for Humber & South

Dear Mrs Watts

Justices' Clerk for Humber & South

Dear Mrs Watts

When calling please ask for: Karen Crocken

Minicom VII: 01302 369066

North East Lincolnshire

I acknowledge receipt of your letter of 13 February 2014.

Watts, Alison <alison.watts@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>

Good Morning Mr Xxxxx

Justices' Clerk for Humber & South

Dear Mrs Watts

When calling please ask for: Karen Crocken

Minicom VII: 01302 369066

North East Lincolnshire

I acknowledge receipt of your letter of 22 April 2014.

Dear Mrs Watts

Central Secretariat Office

Re: Complaint into conduct of Mr J A O'Nions JP and Mr T A Shepherdson JP

THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND LORD CHANCELLOR'S

Doncaster Magistrates Court

THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND LORD CHANCELLOR'S

Doncaster Magistrates Court

Our Ref: AW/KC

"Anckorn, Judy" <judy.anckorn@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk>

THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND LORD CHANCELLOR'S

Doncaster Magistrates Court

Our Ref: AW/KC

Judicial Appointments & Conduct

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

T 020 3334 2900

JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS AND CONDUCT OMBUDSMANS OFFICE

I attach a copy of an Annex to the Ombudsmans 2006/07 Annual Report,

"Jones, Adam (JACO)" <Adam.Jones@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>

Dear Mrs Watts

"Jones, Adam (JACO)" <Adam.Jones@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>

"Jones, Adam (JACO)" <Adam.Jones@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>

Judicial Appointments & Conduct

Our ref: 15-2489

Your complaint to the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman

Judicial Appointments & Conduct

Our ref: 15-2489

Your complaint to the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman

OX: 742840 (Doncaster

VII: 01302 369066

Dear Mr ,.. ... _.~

Judicial Appointments & Conduct

Our ref: 15-2489

Your complaint to the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman

"Rose, Nicholas" <nick.rose@jaco.gsi.gov.uk>

Complaint by Mr Xxxx Xxxxx - Ombudsmans Preliminary Investigation Report

JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS AND CONDUCT OMBUDSMANS PRELIMINARY

Mr Xxxx Xxxxxx asked me to review the investigation by the Humber Advisory

Mr Xxxxx complained to me on 8 August 2015. I have carried out a preliminary

Mr Xxxxx faced a summons to appear at Grimsby Magistrates Court on 2

Complaint by Mr Xxxx Xxxxx - Ombudsmans Preliminary Investigation Report

Paul Kernaghan CBE

Investigating Officers Report - Complaint from Mr Xxxx Yyyyyy