Skip to main content

Cafcass refuse complaints

One thing I find unusual about CAFCASS is that they will refuse to register complaints from time to time.

They refuse to register a similar number of complaints as they actually register. (same order of magnitude).

The numbers of complaints not registered in recent years are

YearNumber of complaints not registeredRegistered Complaints

Figures updated as a result of CAFCASS update (correcting 2005/6) and providing registered figures.


Tristan said…
I'm suprised that the orders of magnitude are the same. From my knowledge of CAFCASS (second hand), they get a lot of complaints.
Tristan said…
Having spoken to my wife (who has worked in admin at CAFCASS) this is because there's a time limit you have to complain and about 50% of complaints fall outside that time limit - often several years after the recommendation has been made (she once had someone try to make a complaint after 10 years - the records back then have probably largely been destroyed (unlike today when everything must be kept for far longer).
jacquig said…
I have looked at the Cafcass Annual Report ( for 2007 which makes clear that the unregistered complaints relate to disputed evidential issues before the courts and are referred back to the court to be addressed there. So nothing particularly sinister going on. There were only 194 registered complaints and Cafcass received 210 compliments! The vast majority of complaints are about private law matters.

john said…
There is, however, a question as to whether disputed evidenece should only be dealt with in the courts.

I am aware of a situation in which a guardian is attempting to pervert the courts of justice. That logically needs to be both considered in court and also by CAFCASS.
pleasedconsumer said…

Let me first comment, how great your blog is. I found it while I was looking on the internet for consumer product complaints. During my search I have also found excellent and funny site about product complaints.

Check them out. You will like them.


Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…