HMCTS Report and Accounts 2017-2018 Bribery

The request was successful.

Dear Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service,
1. HMCTS' Annual Report and Accounts for the year 2017-2018 refer to receiving three reports of bribery and corruption during 2017-2018, of which two were referred to the Police for consideration of a criminal prosecution and that a full thematic review of the process relating to the third referral is being undertaken.
No mention of the outcome of this full thematic review is contained in the Annual Report for 2018-2019?

2. Please provide details of the outcome of the two complaints referred to the Police/CPS and details of any sentence passed and/or fines regarding the criminal prosecutions.

3. Please provide the details/outcome of the full thematic review relating to the third report.

4. Please provide the Notes of any meeting(s) this thematic review was discussed at HMCTS Board level.

5. Please provide details if any employees of HMCTS were disciplined and /or dismissed as a result of the three reports of bribery and corruption and the Department(s) they were employed in.

6. Please confirm the total number of complaints/reports HMCTS received for bribery and corruption for the years 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 and any action taken.

Yours faithfully,

J E Garner

Disclosure Team, HM Courts and Tribunals Service

This is an automated confirmation that your email has been received by the
Disclosure Team (Ministry of Justice) mailbox.

 

Freedom of Information (FOI)

 

If your email is a FOI request you can expect a response within 20 working
days.

 

However, please be advised that due to the current situation with COVID-19
we may not be able to provide a response within this timescale; if this is
the case, we will contact you to provide an update.

 

Every effort is being made to respond to FOIs as usual but the current
situation means that available Departmental resources will be needed on
other high priority areas.

 

We kindly ask for your understanding during this unprecedented situation
and we will aim to deal with your FOI request as soon as is practically
possible.

 

Subject Access Requests (under the General Data Protection Regulation
((EU) 2016/679)) (the Regulation) and/or Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA))

 

If your email is a SAR, you can expect a response within 1 calendar month.

 

However, please be advised that due to the current situation with COVID-19
we may not be able to provide within this timescale; if this is the case,
we will contact you to provide an update.

 

Every effort is being made to respond to SARs as usual but the current
situation means that available Departmental resources will be needed on
other high priority areas.

 

We kindly ask for your understanding during this unprecedented situation
and we will aim to deal with your SAR as soon as is practically possible.

 

 

show quoted sections

Weston, Bob (Gloucester), HM Courts and Tribunals Service

1 Attachment

Please find attached an acknowledgement of the above request.

 

Bob Weston

 

Knowledge Information Liaison Officer

 

HMCTS - Analysis and Performance Division, Finance, Governance and
Performance Directorate.

 

Tel: 01452 334448 or 0203 3345511

 

E [1][email address]

 

1st Floor | Twyver House | Bruton Way | Gloucester | GL1 1PE

 

" I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor
to make representation or other statements which may bind the Ministry of
Justice in any way via electronic means".

 

show quoted sections

Weston, Bob (Gloucester), HM Courts and Tribunals Service

1 Attachment

Please find attached a response to the above request

 

Bob Weston

 

Knowledge Information Liaison Officer

 

HMCTS - Analysis and Performance Division, Finance, Governance and
Performance Directorate.

 

Tel: 01452 334448 or 0203 3345511

 

E [1][email address]

 

1st Floor | Twyver House | Bruton Way | Gloucester | GL1 1PE

 

" I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor
to make representation or other statements which may bind the Ministry of
Justice in any way via electronic means".

 

show quoted sections

Dear Weston, Bob (Gloucester),
Thank you very much for the information.
Regarding Questions (1) (3) and (4), I have the following queries, which I would be grateful if you could please clarify for me.
In view of the HMCTS Governance and Assurance RRDS policy as detailed below, and bearing this in mind,where there are clear guidelines as to the retention of information, which varies between 3 and 10 years, it is disconcerting to be informed, that no information has been kept, as to the serious issue of a "full thermatic review into bribery and corruption", even if it was subsequently deemed unnecessary, in 2017/2018.
To be "deemed unnecessary" there had to have been a decision making process and therefore information, which according to 10, 11 and 16 below, would have to be kept for a minimum of 5 years and up to 7 years.
1. Please explain why this information was not kept, as it is still only 2020?

"The decision makers at that time no longer work in HMCTS"
2. Forgive me if I am interpreting this incorrectly, but are you saying, that just because an employee leaves HMCTS' employment, whatever they were working on at the time, gets abandoned?

The documents relating to the "full thermatic review" 2017-2018, are quite clearly not outside of your record retention period, as can be seen from the information below.
3. Please provide an explanation as to why these documents were destroyed before time?*

Information from the Gov.UK website re Record Retention and Disposition Schedules:
According to the MoJ's retention policy and guidance, it confirms what is/isn't a record, being" Information contributes to an action taken or decision made" according to HMCTS Governance and Assurance RRDS https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk...
it states the following:

10. HMCTS Counter-Fraud and Investigations team:
a) Investigation reports and case documents or reports*
b) Other corporate reports
Keep for five years from report date and then destroy

11. b) HMCTS Annual Reports and Accounts - Governance Statement and supporting documentation
b-d) Keep for six years from date of report and then destroy

15. HMCTS management information
Keep for 10 years and then review:

16. Reports to the ARAC (Audit, Risk Assurance Committee) and committees*
Keep for seven years and then destroy

25. Litigation cases
Keep for six years from last action and then destroy

Question 6: 2018-2019 "One report of corruption"
4. Please advise as to which Department the report of corruption was related to?
5. Please advise as to which department deemed there was insufficient evidence for a criminal investigation and their reasons/evidence for doing so?

Finally, HMCTS are to be commended on their 17,000 staff, none of whom are ever found responsible for bribery, fraud or corruption.

I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,

J E Garner

NE RSU FOI & DPA, HM Courts and Tribunals Service

1 Attachment

Dear Sir or Madam,
 
Please find attached the acknowledgment to your request for an internal
review of FOI 200803019.
 
 
 
Yours sincerely
 
K Smith
Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer
 
North East Region
 
For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see
[1]Here is how HMCTS uses personal data about you.
 
[2]https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-...
 
 
 
  ________________________________  
This e-mail and any attachments 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. 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.

References

Visible links
1. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisati...
2. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-...

NE RSU FOI & DPA, HM Courts and Tribunals Service

1 Attachment

Dear Sir or Madam,
 
Please find attached the response to your request for an internal review
of FOI request 200803019.
 
 
 
 
Yours sincerely
 
K Smith
Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer
 
North East Region
 
For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see
[1]Here is how HMCTS uses personal data about you.
 
[2]https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-...
 
 
 
  ________________________________  
This e-mail and any attachments 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. 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.

References

Visible links
1. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisati...
2. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-...

Dear NE RSU FOI & DPA,
Thank you for your response and further explanations, however I am not entirely convinced that no information can be found as to my Question 1:

In the HM Courts & Tribunal Service Annual Report and Accounts 2017-2018, printed 5 July 2018, Section 3 Controls, Governance and Accountability report Page 93, it quite clearly states:
"A full thematic review of the process relating to the third referral is being undertaken"

So one would assume if CEO Susan Acland-Hood signs off the accounts which state "is being undertaken"
at that point it must have been in progress?

Therefore if it was subsequently, halted, delayed or dismissed entirely, there would be recorded information (in any form) to substantiate the decision process, which should have been kept for a minimum of 3 years, i.e. until 2021.

Finally, please define "reasonable searches"?

Yours sincerely,

J E Garner

NE RSU FOI & DPA, HM Courts and Tribunals Service

Thank you for your email. It has been received by the NE RSU FOI & DPA
Team. This inbox is monitored regularly and a member of the team will
respond in due course.  
 
***Please be aware if you mark your message as private, we will not be
able to see this in our inbox. Please send under standard MS outlook
settings***

show quoted sections

NE RSU FOI & DPA, HM Courts and Tribunals Service

Dear Sir or Madam,

Thank you for your email. May I refer you to the information at the end of the response if you are unsatisfied with the response to your request for an internal review.

Appeal Rights

If you are not satisfied with this response you have the right to apply to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The Commissioner is an independent regulator who has the power to direct us to respond to your request differently, if she considers that we have handled it incorrectly.

You can contact the ICO at the following address:

Information Commissioner’s Office

https://ico.org.uk/Global/contact-us

Yours sincerely

K Smith
Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer

North East Region

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see Here is how HMCTS uses personal data about you.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-...

show quoted sections

Dear NE RSU FOI & DPA, K Smith
Thank you for your email.

I have sent a complaint to the Information Commissioner.

Yours sincerely,

J E Garner

NE RSU FOI & DPA, HM Courts and Tribunals Service

Thank you for your email. It has been received by the NE RSU FOI & DPA
Team. This inbox is monitored regularly and a member of the team will
respond in due course.  
 
***Please be aware if you mark your message as private, we will not be
able to see this in our inbox. Please send under standard MS outlook
settings***

show quoted sections

J E Garner left an annotation ()

A complaint has been sent today to the ICO.
It is inconceivable that HMCTS cannot find the information requested.
If a "full thematic review" of a report of Bribery and Corruption was detailed in HMCTS' Annual Report and Accounts, this would have been referred to HMCTS Fraud for investigation.
HMCTS Fraud keep their investigation reports and case documents for 5 years.
HMCTS Annual Reports and Accounts keep their supporting documentation for 6 years.
However HMCTS cannot locate anything after a "reasonable" search.
One can only conclude they are searching in the wrong place?
Or they do not want to release the information?

J E Garner left an annotation ()

I have received a response from the ICO today (8 October) which states "Your complaint has been accepted as eligible for further consideration and will be allocated to a case officer as soon as possible"
I will keep everyone updated as to the progress.

J E Garner left an annotation ()

I have received a response from the ICO, my case has now been given a reference number in order to request more information, which I have supplied.
With reference to "A full thematic review of the third referral (bribery and corruption) is being undertaken" as well as appearing on page 93 of HMCTS Annual Report & Accounts 2017-2018, it ALSO appears on page 24 on the HMCTS Trust Statement for 2017-2018.
It is commendable to have in place all of these Anti-Fraud & Corruption Policies, Guidance, Conduct Codes relating to Integrity, Honesty etc. and lets not forget "Transparency and Accountability, but they are worthless if any reported corruption is swept under the carpet. As the famous proverb states "Fine words butter no parsnips"

J E Garner left an annotation ()

I have just received a response from the ICO who are now investigating my complaint.
In particular the ICO will be asking for the reasons why the MoJ has not retained the information I requested, for 3 years from 2018, and the searches it has undertaken.
The reference to a "full thematic review" appears in both 2017/2018 HMCTS' Annual Report & Accounts as well as HMCTS' Trust Statement, so it is inconceivable that they cannot find any documentation relating to them both!

Weston, Bob (Gloucester), HM Courts and Tribunals Service

1 Attachment

Please find attached a revised response to the above request

 

Bob Weston

 

Knowledge Information Liaison Officer

 

HMCTS - Analysis and Performance Division, Finance, Governance and
Performance Directorate.

 

Tel: 01452 334448 or 0203 3345511

 

E [1][email address]

 

1st Floor | Twyver House | Bruton Way | Gloucester | GL1 1PE

 

" I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor
to make representation or other statements which may bind the Ministry of
Justice in any way via electronic means".

 

show quoted sections

J E Garner left an annotation ()

Obviously my referral to the ICO has had an impact, amazing what HMCTS were actually able to find in their records after all!

J Roberts left an annotation ()

From:

'Regarding Questions (1), (3) and (4), I should tell you that after making all reasonable searches HMCTS has been unable to identify or recover any recorded information relating to a thematic review of the process carried out following the publication of HMCTS Annual Report and Accounts for the year 2017/18.'

To:

'Regarding Questions (1), (3) and (4), I can tell you we have found a thematic review that did involve of the HMCTS Counter Fraud team. The review was carried out in May 2018 at the London Civil and Family Cluster, it covered a number of sites; Wandsworth County Court, East London County Court, West London County Court and the London Regional Bailiff Team. Of particular interest to the Counter Fraud team was alleged false communication, the management structure and controls, all within the Bailiff team.'

Your persistence paid off. It appears that the public can't rely on the HMCTS to deal with information requests without the intervention of the Commissioner.

J E Garner left an annotation ()

Thank you J Roberts.
However it does become somewhat wearing to have to take HMCTS to the ICO (I have 3 more currently being reviewed by the ICO) when in reality HMCTS could and should just do their job properly in the first place.
The culture of denial and cover up exists across the board in every single government department I have ever had the misfortune to deal with.
I've recently been told to go to the PHSO after a 7 year battle with MoJ, I'm not even going to comment on that one....

Sam Balls left an annotation ()

The MoJ will have no doubt signposted you to the PHSO for the same reason a Local Authority would signpost an aggrieved customer to the LGO or the police to the IOPC. These are the tried and trusted routes relied on by public authorities to cover-up wrongdoing.

Parliamentary Ombudsman 18 Aug 2017 letter for example https://tinyurl.com/sxvvjxwb

The matter involved criminal allegations of malfeasance and fraud involving a false claim made by the MoJ that 10 items of post had been sent to the complainant over a 4 year period which the complainant claims never to have received, and believes they were dishonestly constructed later (to cover their tracks) to satisfy enquiries made by the judicial ombudsman (JACO) and an investigation carried out by HMCTS complaints team.

J E Garner left an annotation ()

Sam
The corruption, denials, lack of transparency and accountability is rife.
The powers that be do not even care when they are found out as they know they will be protected.
The WDTK site is awesome!
I feel your pain.
J

Alan Nesbitt left an annotation ()

To Sam Balls, your description exactly matches my experience.

I have repeatedly got the "we talked to the people accused and they say everything is ok" kind of response - including from the Police. If you question this - they either say they cannot take it further or simply ignore any emails.