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. …

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).


R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…