Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label attachment file name file name title title previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

19326

	registered interest
	date	06/11/2013
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many overseas trips, and at what total cost, his Department made in each year since 2010; and what the costs of (a) flights, (b) internal travel, (c) hotel accommodation and (d) subsistence were of each trip.
	tabling member constituency	Nottingham East
	tabling member printed	Chris Leslie
	uin	174860
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice has reduced the overall cost of air travel by almost half since 2009, and our total spend on all travel has fallen by more than 40 per cent in the same period – a saving of more than £9m.</p><p> </p><p>Furthermore, this year, the Justice Secretary toughened up the rules to ban first and business class travel for Ministers and officials in the department other than in exceptional circumstances where this is required to meet business need.</p><p> </p><p>Overseas travel makes up a small proportion of the Department's overall travel requirement. Flights and travel by Eurostar are booked through our contracted supplier, and whilst the MoJ records data on transactions, it does not hold details of the cost or destination of individual trips centrally. The cost of breaking down all travel in the ways requested would be disproportionate, as managers across the Department would have to create a breakdown of every trip taken, itemised by the different kinds of expenditure.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 30/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	422 label Biography information for Mr Chris Leslie

35511

	registered interest
	date	28/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total amount is of fines (a) issued by the courts and (b) uncollected was in (i) 2010, (ii) 2011, (iii) 2012 and (iv) 2013.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	185484
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The value of fines imposed, collected, cancelled and outstanding for the periods from April 2011 onwards are set out below.</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Period</p></td><td><p>Value of fines imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fine collected in the same period they were imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fines cancelled in the same period they were imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fines imposed outstanding at the end of the period</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>April 2011 to December 2011</p></td><td><p>£170,962,169</p></td><td><p>£54,843,753</p></td><td><p>£12,470,347</p></td><td><p>£103,648,069</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2012 to December 2012</p></td><td><p>£273,944,704</p></td><td><p>£70,032,092</p></td><td><p>£17,470,412</p></td><td><p>£186,442,200</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2013 to September 2013 (latest published period)</p></td><td><p>£210,561,372</p></td><td><p>£44,541,677</p></td><td><p>£11,548,807</p></td><td><p>£154,470,888</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The values above only refer to fines and not any other elements of financial impositions such as prosecutor costs, compensation and victim surcharge. Where financial impositions are paid by instalments the fine element is the last part to be paid off after compensation, victim surcharge and prosecutor costs. The values cancelled can relate to legal or administrative cancellations. The value outstanding will include amounts remaining on accounts that are being paid by instalments or were not due for payment by the end of the period specified.</p><p> </p><p>It is not possible to provide data in this format for any period prior to April 2011 as new performance management information was introduced at that time. It is not possible to identify how much of the amounts imposed in 2011 or 2012 remained outstanding by the end of September 2013 (latest published data period) as data is only available for 18 months after the date imposed – after that it is not possible to extract the amount outstanding for a specific period from the total balance outstanding.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year. At the end of September 2013 total collection (all imposition types excluding confiscation orders) was higher than the same point in the previous year and the outstanding balance had reduced since the start of the financial year. On average over the last 12 month 69% of accounts have been either closed or are compliant with payment terms by 12 months after imposition.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 185483 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

35512

	registered interest
	date	28/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total amount is of fines issued by the courts between 2010 and 2013 which remain uncollected.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	185483
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The value of fines imposed, collected, cancelled and outstanding for the periods from April 2011 onwards are set out below.</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Period</p></td><td><p>Value of fines imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fine collected in the same period they were imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fines cancelled in the same period they were imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fines imposed outstanding at the end of the period</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>April 2011 to December 2011</p></td><td><p>£170,962,169</p></td><td><p>£54,843,753</p></td><td><p>£12,470,347</p></td><td><p>£103,648,069</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2012 to December 2012</p></td><td><p>£273,944,704</p></td><td><p>£70,032,092</p></td><td><p>£17,470,412</p></td><td><p>£186,442,200</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2013 to September 2013 (latest published period)</p></td><td><p>£210,561,372</p></td><td><p>£44,541,677</p></td><td><p>£11,548,807</p></td><td><p>£154,470,888</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The values above only refer to fines and not any other elements of financial impositions such as prosecutor costs, compensation and victim surcharge. Where financial impositions are paid by instalments the fine element is the last part to be paid off after compensation, victim surcharge and prosecutor costs. The values cancelled can relate to legal or administrative cancellations. The value outstanding will include amounts remaining on accounts that are being paid by instalments or were not due for payment by the end of the period specified.</p><p> </p><p>It is not possible to provide data in this format for any period prior to April 2011 as new performance management information was introduced at that time. It is not possible to identify how much of the amounts imposed in 2011 or 2012 remained outstanding by the end of September 2013 (latest published data period) as data is only available for 18 months after the date imposed – after that it is not possible to extract the amount outstanding for a specific period from the total balance outstanding.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year. At the end of September 2013 total collection (all imposition types excluding confiscation orders) was higher than the same point in the previous year and the outstanding balance had reduced since the start of the financial year. On average over the last 12 month 69% of accounts have been either closed or are compliant with payment terms by 12 months after imposition.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 185484 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

35841

	registered interest
	date	29/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how much HM Courts and Tribunal Service spent on interpreters in 2011, 2012 and 2013; how much was spent on interpreting each language in those years; and how much was paid by defendants towards these costs.
	tabling member constituency	Preston
	tabling member printed	Mark Hendrick
	uin	185824
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>The Department does not hold centrally all of the information that the Honourable Member has requested. Although we can not provide all the data on spend for the periods requested we can provide the annual spend for interpreters sourced through the Capita-TI Contract for Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunal Service as below:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Calendar Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2012</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2013</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£7,940,128.79</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£15,537,821.29</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Off Contract bookings made by HMCTS are outside of these spend figures. The number of bookings made off contract has substantially decreased since the start of 2012 with those bookings moving onto the Capita TI contract. This move from off contract to Capita TI is reflected in the changing year on year contract spend.</p><p> </p><p>Spend for 2012 is based on an 11 month period as the contract did not go live until 30th January 2012. Expenditure has also increased in the second year of contract due to changes made to the contract in May 2013 and an estimated 20% increase on volume. £15m was saved in year one of the contract.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In this instance to provide the requested information on total annual spend and spend by language, would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold of £850.00 or 4 ½ working days.</p><p> </p><p>In order to provide the information we would be required toobtain a number of large reports from electronic databases. The relevant data must then be manually extracted and collated. It would also require comparison against additional financial data before analysis. We estimate that this process for the spend data would take approximately 6 working days given the volume of data involved.</p><p> </p><p>Defendants in criminal cases do not contribute towards the costs of interpreters that are provided by HMCTS. Charges for HMCTS provided interpreters in civil, family and tribunal cases are not passed directly to parties, although the costs may be recovered from court and tribunal fees in the jurisdictions where they apply.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	473 label Biography information for Sir Mark Hendrick

35851

	registered interest
	date	29/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what value of confiscation orders were (a) issued and (b) uncollected in each year since 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	185720
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The value of confiscation orders imposed and the amounts outstanding for those orders, both with and without interest, as at 30 January 2014, for the calendar years from 2010 onwards, are set out in the Table A below. The volume of orders imposed and those that remain outstanding is in Table B</p><p><strong>Table A</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Value of Confiscation Orders Imposed</p></td><td><p>Order Balance Remaining to Collect Excluding Interest</p><p>As at 30/01/2014</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>£276,143,735</p></td><td><p>£167,176,784</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>£187,128,205</p></td><td><p>£73,910,472</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>£271,998,720</p></td><td><p>£162,286,156</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>£245,728,131</p></td><td><p>£176,875,895</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Total</p></td><td><p>£980,998,791</p></td><td><p>£580,249,307</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Table B</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Volume of Confiscation Orders Imposed</p></td><td><p>Volume of Orders with an Order Balance Remaining to Collect Excluding Interest</p><p>As at 30/01/2014</p></td><td><p>Total Volume of Orders to Collect Including Interest</p><p>As at 30/01/2014</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>6,214</p></td><td><p>915</p></td><td><p>2,289</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>6,286</p></td><td><p>1,065</p></td><td><p>2,342</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>6,458</p></td><td><p>1,386</p></td><td><p>2,399</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>6,139</p></td><td><p>2,500</p></td><td><p>3,141</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Total</p></td><td><p>25,097</p></td><td><p>5,866</p></td><td><p>10,171</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Confiscation orders are one of the key mechanisms available to the Government to deprive criminals of the proceeds of their crimes. The value of the order imposed, which is often very high, is based on the criminal benefit attributed to the crime and may, therefore, exceed the value of realisable assets that are known to the Court at the time of imposition. Crucially, an outstanding order stops the criminal benefitting from the proceeds of crime and ensures that, if the assets are discovered in the future, they can be seized.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) and other enforcement agencies take the issue of recovering criminal assets very seriously and are working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide.</p><p> </p><p>Although, as the Enforcement Authority, HMCTS owns the debt, it is not always the lead enforcement agency. HMCTS tends to lead on the high volume, low value orders. Prosecution agencies, including the CPS and the Serious Fraud Office, lead on enforcement where they have put Restraint Orders on the defendant's property to protect the asset, or where the professional expertise of an Enforcement Receiver will be required to enforce the confiscation order.</p><p> </p><p>All outstanding amounts are actively pursued using a range of enforcement tools open to us. A confiscation order is a life time order and only amounts up to £50 can be written off. Default sentences of up to 10 years in prison are activated for non payment. Serving the default sentence does not cancel the debt and we will continue to pursue the amount owed. Interest is added to the order balance outstanding at the rate of 8% per annum. The fact that interest accrues at such a high rate and amounts over £50 cannot be written off, contribute to the increasing level of debt. At the end of December 2013, the total amount outstanding was £1.47 billion, of which £372 million was interest alone. At the end of December 2013, including interest £24 million is owed by defendants who are deceased and a further £86 million is owed by defendants who have been deported. Even for those that are deported we still try to actively pursue the defendants assets held abroad, but we rely on the cooperation of overseas enforcement agencies, which is often not forthcoming. The Agencies responsible for enforcement are building better relationships with overseas authorities and engage specialist forensic teams to track down hidden assets.</p><p> </p><p>The amount defendants repaid from their criminal activity across all agencies reached an all time high during 2012/13, with a total of £133.1 million recovered. That represented a 7% increase on the £124.1 million recovered during 2011/12. The total amount recovered has increased for the last four consecutive years and once again we are on course to have another record breaking year this financial year. For the 2013/14 financial year, at the end of December 2013, £102.8 million had been recovered, which is an increase of 2% on the £100.5 million that was collected up to December 2012. Since 2008/09, when £98.8 Million was recovered, the amount collected from criminals has increased by 35%.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS is seeking a commercial partner to help increase collections, reduce enforcement costs and importantly, ensure more criminals pay. A new national system has been implemented to manage the collection of fixed penalty notices, with all of the Police Forces having transferred to the new platform by June 2013.The continuing improvement the Agencies are making combined with our future plans will ensure that more criminals pay and that taxpayers get better value for money.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 186101 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

35852

	registered interest
	date	29/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many outstanding confiscation orders were written off in each year since 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	185721
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The volume of confiscation orders reduced or written off from 2010 to 2013 is recorded in Table A below, while the value of amounts reduced or written off is recorded in Table B.</p><p><strong>Table A</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p>Volume of Confiscation Orders Written Off</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Category</p></td><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>Total</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>DTOA Default Served</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>12</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Inadequacy</p></td><td><p>202</p></td><td><p>202</p></td><td><p>163</p></td><td><p>185</p></td><td><p>752</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>POCA s24 Discharge</p></td><td><p>43</p></td><td><p>61</p></td><td><p>42</p></td><td><p>29</p></td><td><p>175</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>POCA s25 Discharge</p></td><td><p>124</p></td><td><p>72</p></td><td><p>37</p></td><td><p>42</p></td><td><p>275</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Reconsideration of Available Assets</p></td><td><p>401</p></td><td><p>474</p></td><td><p>567</p></td><td><p>521</p></td><td><p>1,963</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Grand Total</p></td><td><p>774</p></td><td><p>811</p></td><td><p>813</p></td><td><p>779</p></td><td><p>3,177</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Table B</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p>Value of Confiscation Orders Written Off</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Category</p></td><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>Total</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>DTOA Default Served</p></td><td><p>£47,101</p></td><td><p>£882,064</p></td><td><p>£1,162,397</p></td><td><p>£22,082</p></td><td><p>£2,113,644</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Inadequacy</p></td><td><p>£5,707,742</p></td><td><p>£8,924,637</p></td><td><p>£3,673,845</p></td><td><p>£11,815,275</p></td><td><p>£30,121,499</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>POCA s24 Discharge</p></td><td><p>£70,030</p></td><td><p>£780,328</p></td><td><p>£335,969</p></td><td><p>£483,443</p></td><td><p>£1,669,770</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>POCA s25 Discharge</p></td><td><p>£1,479</p></td><td><p>£980</p></td><td><p>£797</p></td><td><p>£1,179</p></td><td><p>£4,435</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Reconsideration of Available Assets</p></td><td><p>£8,019,707</p></td><td><p>£21,235,494</p></td><td><p>£16,739,659</p></td><td><p>£20,158,107</p></td><td><p>£66,152,967</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Grand Total</p></td><td><p>£13,846,059</p></td><td><p>£31,823,503</p></td><td><p>£21,912,667</p></td><td><p>£32,480,086</p></td><td><p>£100,062,315</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Below are explanations of the limited ways an outstanding confiscation order can be reduced or written off.</p><p><strong>Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 (DTOA) Default Served</strong> – Serving the default sentence of up to 10 years for non payment of a confiscation order under this pre-Proceeds Of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) legislation cancels the amount outstanding in full</p><p><strong>Inadequacy </strong>– Under pre-POCA legislation the defendant can make an application to the High Court, for a fee of £350, to apply for a Certificate of Inadequacy (COI) to reduce the order amount where assets have not achieved the value assessed at the confiscation hearing.</p><p><strong>POCA s24 Discharge – </strong>The Enforcement Authority can apply to the Crown Court to reduce amounts up to £1,000 where they are satisfied the value of the asset has not met the value assessed at the confiscation hearing. The most likely cause for this is fluctuations in foreign currency.</p><p><strong>POCA s25 Discharge – </strong>The Enforcement Authority can apply to the Crown Court to discharge amounts up to £50, where there is little prospect of recovering the small amount outstanding or it is no longer cost effective to do so.</p><p><strong>Reconsideration of Available Assets</strong> - Under POCA legislation the defendant can make an application to the Crown Court, to apply for a Variation Order to reduce the order amount where assets have not achieved the value assessed at the confiscation hearing. Unlike a pre-POCA COI application, no fee is payable.</p><p> </p><p>Confiscation orders are one of the key mechanisms available to the Government to deprive criminals of the proceeds of their crimes. The value of the order imposed, which is often very high, is based on the criminal benefit attributed to the crime and may, therefore, exceed the value of realisable assets that are known to the Court at the time of imposition. Crucially, an outstanding order stops the criminal benefitting from the proceeds of crime and ensures that, if the assets are discovered in the future, they can be seized.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) and other enforcement agencies take the issue of recovering criminal assets very seriously and are working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide.</p><p> </p><p>Although, as the Enforcement Authority, HMCTS owns the debt, it is not always the lead enforcement agency. HMCTS tends to lead on the high volume, low value orders. Prosecution agencies, including the CPS and the Serious Fraud Office, lead on enforcement where they have put Restraint Orders on the defendant's property to protect the asset, or where the professional expertise of an Enforcement Receiver will be required to enforce the confiscation order.</p><p> </p><p>All outstanding amounts are actively pursued using a range of enforcement tools open to us. A confiscation order is a life time order and only amounts up to £50 can be written off. Default sentences of up to 10 years in prison are activated for non payment. Serving the default sentence does not cancel the debt and we will continue to pursue the amount owed. Interest is added to the order balance outstanding at the rate of 8% per annum. The fact that interest accrues at such a high rate and amounts over £50 cannot be written off, contribute to the increasing level of debt. At the end of December 2013, the total amount outstanding was £1.47 billion, of which £372 million was interest alone. At the end of December 2013, including interest £24 million is owed by defendants who are deceased and a further £86 million is owed by defendants who have been deported. Even for those that are deported we still try to actively pursue the defendants assets held abroad, but we rely on the cooperation of overseas enforcement agencies, which is often not forthcoming. The Agencies responsible for enforcement are building better relationships with overseas authorities and engage specialist forensic teams to track down hidden assets.</p><p> </p><p>The amount defendants repaid from their criminal activity across all agencies reached an all time high during 2012/13, with a total of £133.1 million recovered. That represented a 7% increase on the £124.1 million recovered during 2011/12. The total amount recovered has increased for the last four consecutive years and once again we are on course to have another record breaking year this financial year. For the 2013/14 financial year, at the end of December 2013, £102.8 million had been recovered, which is an increase of 2% on the £100.5 million that was collected up to December 2012. Since 2008/09, when £98.8 Million was recovered, the amount collected from criminals has increased by 35%.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS is seeking a commercial partner to help increase collections, reduce enforcement costs and importantly, ensure more criminals pay. A new national system has been implemented to manage the collection of fixed penalty notices, with all of the Police Forces having transferred to the new platform by June 2013.The continuing improvement the Agencies are making combined with our future plans will ensure that more criminals pay and that taxpayers get better value for money.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

35853

	registered interest
	date	29/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the value of outstanding confiscation orders was on 31 December (a) 2010, (b) 2011, (c) 2012 and (d) 2013.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	185722
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>Our accounts are based on financial years as opposed to calendar years; therefore the value and volume of outstanding confiscation orders as at 31 March, from 2010 through to 2013, are set out in the table below.</p><p> </p><p>However, as at 31 December 2013, there were 20,634 outstanding confiscation orders totalling £1,466,924,522 including interest. Excluding interest the figure is £1,094,584,445.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"><p><strong>Volume of Orders Outstanding</strong></p></td><td colspan="2"><p><strong>Value of Orders Outstanding </strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td><p><strong>Excluding Interest</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Including Interest</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Excluding Interest</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Including Interest</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>31 March 2010</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>6,359</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>12,771</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>711,409,802</strong></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>870,804,796</strong></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>31 March 2011</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>7,488</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>15,227</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,046,473,308</strong></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,254,278,825</strong></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>31 March 2012</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>8,397</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>17,440</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>915,151,064</strong></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,195,167,499</strong></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>31 March 2013</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>9,295</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>19,727</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,055,230,330</strong></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,406,638,265</strong></strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>During 2011/12, two successful appeals with a combined total of £184.7 million were reduced to a total of £32.3 million. This reduced the outstanding debt by £152.4 million.</p><p> </p><p>Confiscation orders are one of the key mechanisms available to the Government to deprive criminals of the proceeds of their crimes. The value of the order imposed, which is often very high, is based on the criminal benefit attributed to the crime and may, therefore, exceed the value of realisable assets that are known to the Court at the time of imposition. Crucially, an outstanding order stops the criminal benefitting from the proceeds of crime and ensures that, if the assets are discovered in the future, they can be seized.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) and other enforcement agencies take the issue of recovering criminal assets very seriously and are working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide.</p><p> </p><p>Although, as the Enforcement Authority, HMCTS owns the debt, it is not always the lead enforcement agency. HMCTS tends to lead on the high volume, low value orders. Prosecution agencies, including the CPS and the Serious Fraud Office, lead on enforcement where they have put Restraint Orders on the defendant's property to protect the asset, or where the professional expertise of an Enforcement Receiver will be required to enforce the confiscation order.</p><p> </p><p>All outstanding amounts are actively pursued using a range of enforcement tools open to us. A confiscation order is a life time order and only amounts up to £50 can be written off. Default sentences of up to 10 years in prison are activated for non payment. Serving the default sentence does not cancel the debt and we will continue to pursue the amount owed. Interest is added to the order balance outstanding at the rate of 8% per annum. The fact that interest accrues at such a high rate and amounts over £50 cannot be written off, contribute to the increasing level of debt. At the end of December 2013, the total amount outstanding was £1.47 billion, of which £372 million was interest alone. At the end of December 2013, including interest £24 million is owed by defendants who are deceased and a further £86 million is owed by defendants who have been deported. Even for those that are deported we still try to actively pursue the defendants assets held abroad, but we rely on the cooperation of overseas enforcement agencies, which is often not forthcoming. The Agencies responsible for enforcement are building better relationships with overseas authorities and engage specialist forensic teams to track down hidden assets.</p><p> </p><p>The amount defendants repaid from their criminal activity across all agencies reached an all time high during 2012/13, with a total of £133.1 million recovered. That represented a 7% increase on the £124.1 million recovered during 2011/12. The total amount recovered has increased for the last four consecutive years and once again we are on course to have another record breaking year this financial year. For the 2013/14 financial year, at the end of December 2013, £102.8 million had been recovered, which is an increase of 2% on the £100.5 million that was collected up to December 2012. Since 2008/09, when £98.8 Million was recovered, the amount collected from criminals has increased by 35%.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS is seeking a commercial partner to help increase collections, reduce enforcement costs and importantly, ensure more criminals pay. A new national system has been implemented to manage the collection of fixed penalty notices, with all of the Police Forces having transferred to the new platform by June 2013.The continuing improvement the Agencies are making combined with our future plans will ensure that more criminals pay and that taxpayers get better value for money.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 185723 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

35854

	registered interest
	date	29/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many outstanding confiscation orders there were on 31 December (a) 2010, (b) 2011, (c) 2012 and (d) 2013.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	185723
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>Our accounts are based on financial years as opposed to calendar years; therefore the value and volume of outstanding confiscation orders as at 31 March, from 2010 through to 2013, are set out in the table below.</p><p> </p><p>However, as at 31 December 2013, there were 20,634 outstanding confiscation orders totalling £1,466,924,522 including interest. Excluding interest the figure is £1,094,584,445.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"><p><strong>Volume of Orders Outstanding</strong></p></td><td colspan="2"><p><strong>Value of Orders Outstanding </strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td><p><strong>Excluding Interest</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Including Interest</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Excluding Interest</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Including Interest</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>31 March 2010</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>6,359</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>12,771</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>711,409,802</strong></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>870,804,796</strong></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>31 March 2011</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>7,488</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>15,227</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,046,473,308</strong></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,254,278,825</strong></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>31 March 2012</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>8,397</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>17,440</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>915,151,064</strong></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,195,167,499</strong></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>31 March 2013</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>9,295</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>19,727</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,055,230,330</strong></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£<strong>1,406,638,265</strong></strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>During 2011/12, two successful appeals with a combined total of £184.7 million were reduced to a total of £32.3 million. This reduced the outstanding debt by £152.4 million.</p><p> </p><p>Confiscation orders are one of the key mechanisms available to the Government to deprive criminals of the proceeds of their crimes. The value of the order imposed, which is often very high, is based on the criminal benefit attributed to the crime and may, therefore, exceed the value of realisable assets that are known to the Court at the time of imposition. Crucially, an outstanding order stops the criminal benefitting from the proceeds of crime and ensures that, if the assets are discovered in the future, they can be seized.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) and other enforcement agencies take the issue of recovering criminal assets very seriously and are working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide.</p><p> </p><p>Although, as the Enforcement Authority, HMCTS owns the debt, it is not always the lead enforcement agency. HMCTS tends to lead on the high volume, low value orders. Prosecution agencies, including the CPS and the Serious Fraud Office, lead on enforcement where they have put Restraint Orders on the defendant's property to protect the asset, or where the professional expertise of an Enforcement Receiver will be required to enforce the confiscation order.</p><p> </p><p>All outstanding amounts are actively pursued using a range of enforcement tools open to us. A confiscation order is a life time order and only amounts up to £50 can be written off. Default sentences of up to 10 years in prison are activated for non payment. Serving the default sentence does not cancel the debt and we will continue to pursue the amount owed. Interest is added to the order balance outstanding at the rate of 8% per annum. The fact that interest accrues at such a high rate and amounts over £50 cannot be written off, contribute to the increasing level of debt. At the end of December 2013, the total amount outstanding was £1.47 billion, of which £372 million was interest alone. At the end of December 2013, including interest £24 million is owed by defendants who are deceased and a further £86 million is owed by defendants who have been deported. Even for those that are deported we still try to actively pursue the defendants assets held abroad, but we rely on the cooperation of overseas enforcement agencies, which is often not forthcoming. The Agencies responsible for enforcement are building better relationships with overseas authorities and engage specialist forensic teams to track down hidden assets.</p><p> </p><p>The amount defendants repaid from their criminal activity across all agencies reached an all time high during 2012/13, with a total of £133.1 million recovered. That represented a 7% increase on the £124.1 million recovered during 2011/12. The total amount recovered has increased for the last four consecutive years and once again we are on course to have another record breaking year this financial year. For the 2013/14 financial year, at the end of December 2013, £102.8 million had been recovered, which is an increase of 2% on the £100.5 million that was collected up to December 2012. Since 2008/09, when £98.8 Million was recovered, the amount collected from criminals has increased by 35%.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS is seeking a commercial partner to help increase collections, reduce enforcement costs and importantly, ensure more criminals pay. A new national system has been implemented to manage the collection of fixed penalty notices, with all of the Police Forces having transferred to the new platform by June 2013.The continuing improvement the Agencies are making combined with our future plans will ensure that more criminals pay and that taxpayers get better value for money.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 185722 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

36153

	registered interest
	date	30/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total value was of fines remaining uncollected on 31 December (a) 2010, (b) 2011, (c) 2012 and (d) 2013.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	186102
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The value of fines imposed, collected, cancelled and outstanding for the periods from April 2011 onwards are set out below.</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Period</p></td><td><p>Value of fines imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fine collected in the same period they were imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fines cancelled in the same period they were imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fines imposed outstanding at the end of the period</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>April 2011 to December 2011</p></td><td><p>£170,962,169</p></td><td><p>£54,843,753</p></td><td><p>£12,470,347</p></td><td><p>£103,648,069</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2012 to December 2012</p></td><td><p>£273,944,704</p></td><td><p>£70,032,092</p></td><td><p>£17,470,412</p></td><td><p>£186,442,200</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2013 to September 2013 (latest published period)</p></td><td><p>£210,561,372</p></td><td><p>£44,541,677</p></td><td><p>£11,548,807</p></td><td><p>£154,470,888</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The values above only refer to fines and not any other elements of financial impositions such as prosecutor costs, compensation and victim surcharge. Where financial impositions are paid by instalments the fine element is the last part to be paid off after compensation, victim surcharge and prosecutor costs. The values cancelled can relate to legal or administrative cancellations. The value outstanding will include amounts remaining on accounts that are being paid by instalments or were not due for payment by the end of the period specified.</p><p> </p><p>It is not possible to provide data in this format for any period prior to April 2011 as new performance management information was introduced at that time. It is not possible to identify how much of the amounts imposed in 2011 or 2012 remained outstanding by the end of September 2013 (latest published data period) as data is only available for 18 months after the date imposed – after that it is not possible to extract the amount outstanding for a specific period from the total balance outstanding.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year. At the end of September 2013 total collection (all imposition types excluding confiscation orders) was higher than the same point in the previous year and the outstanding balance had reduced since the start of the financial year. On average over the last 12 month 69% of accounts have been either closed or are compliant with payment terms by 12 months after imposition.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

36155

	registered interest
	date	30/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many confiscation orders (a) were issued and (b) went uncollected in (i) 2010, (ii) 2011, (iii) 2012 and (iv) 2013.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	186101
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The value of confiscation orders imposed and the amounts outstanding for those orders, both with and without interest, as at 30 January 2014, for the calendar years from 2010 onwards, are set out in the Table A below. The volume of orders imposed and those that remain outstanding is in Table B</p><p><strong>Table A</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Value of Confiscation Orders Imposed</p></td><td><p>Order Balance Remaining to Collect Excluding Interest</p><p>As at 30/01/2014</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>£276,143,735</p></td><td><p>£167,176,784</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>£187,128,205</p></td><td><p>£73,910,472</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>£271,998,720</p></td><td><p>£162,286,156</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>£245,728,131</p></td><td><p>£176,875,895</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Total</p></td><td><p>£980,998,791</p></td><td><p>£580,249,307</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Table B</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Volume of Confiscation Orders Imposed</p></td><td><p>Volume of Orders with an Order Balance Remaining to Collect Excluding Interest</p><p>As at 30/01/2014</p></td><td><p>Total Volume of Orders to Collect Including Interest</p><p>As at 30/01/2014</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>6,214</p></td><td><p>915</p></td><td><p>2,289</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>6,286</p></td><td><p>1,065</p></td><td><p>2,342</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>6,458</p></td><td><p>1,386</p></td><td><p>2,399</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>6,139</p></td><td><p>2,500</p></td><td><p>3,141</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Total</p></td><td><p>25,097</p></td><td><p>5,866</p></td><td><p>10,171</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Confiscation orders are one of the key mechanisms available to the Government to deprive criminals of the proceeds of their crimes. The value of the order imposed, which is often very high, is based on the criminal benefit attributed to the crime and may, therefore, exceed the value of realisable assets that are known to the Court at the time of imposition. Crucially, an outstanding order stops the criminal benefitting from the proceeds of crime and ensures that, if the assets are discovered in the future, they can be seized.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) and other enforcement agencies take the issue of recovering criminal assets very seriously and are working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide.</p><p> </p><p>Although, as the Enforcement Authority, HMCTS owns the debt, it is not always the lead enforcement agency. HMCTS tends to lead on the high volume, low value orders. Prosecution agencies, including the CPS and the Serious Fraud Office, lead on enforcement where they have put Restraint Orders on the defendant's property to protect the asset, or where the professional expertise of an Enforcement Receiver will be required to enforce the confiscation order.</p><p> </p><p>All outstanding amounts are actively pursued using a range of enforcement tools open to us. A confiscation order is a life time order and only amounts up to £50 can be written off. Default sentences of up to 10 years in prison are activated for non payment. Serving the default sentence does not cancel the debt and we will continue to pursue the amount owed. Interest is added to the order balance outstanding at the rate of 8% per annum. The fact that interest accrues at such a high rate and amounts over £50 cannot be written off, contribute to the increasing level of debt. At the end of December 2013, the total amount outstanding was £1.47 billion, of which £372 million was interest alone. At the end of December 2013, including interest £24 million is owed by defendants who are deceased and a further £86 million is owed by defendants who have been deported. Even for those that are deported we still try to actively pursue the defendants assets held abroad, but we rely on the cooperation of overseas enforcement agencies, which is often not forthcoming. The Agencies responsible for enforcement are building better relationships with overseas authorities and engage specialist forensic teams to track down hidden assets.</p><p> </p><p>The amount defendants repaid from their criminal activity across all agencies reached an all time high during 2012/13, with a total of £133.1 million recovered. That represented a 7% increase on the £124.1 million recovered during 2011/12. The total amount recovered has increased for the last four consecutive years and once again we are on course to have another record breaking year this financial year. For the 2013/14 financial year, at the end of December 2013, £102.8 million had been recovered, which is an increase of 2% on the £100.5 million that was collected up to December 2012. Since 2008/09, when £98.8 Million was recovered, the amount collected from criminals has increased by 35%.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS is seeking a commercial partner to help increase collections, reduce enforcement costs and importantly, ensure more criminals pay. A new national system has been implemented to manage the collection of fixed penalty notices, with all of the Police Forces having transferred to the new platform by June 2013.The continuing improvement the Agencies are making combined with our future plans will ensure that more criminals pay and that taxpayers get better value for money.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 185720 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

36157

	registered interest
	date	30/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many fines have been (a) issued by courts and (b) collected in 2013-14 to date.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	185878
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>For the financial year to date, 1st April 2013 to 30th September 2013 (latest published data) 614,693 financial imposition accounts were opened. Of those accounts opened in that period, 182,183 accounts were closed. A further 199,623 accounts were compliant with their payment terms.</p><p> </p><p>Financial impositions include fines imposed in the Magistrates and Crown courts, costs orders, compensation orders, victim surcharge orders and unpaid fixed penalty notices and penalty notices for disorder which are registered as fines for enforcement. The numbers of accounts closed is the position as at the end of September 2013 and those accounts outstanding could now have been closed or collected.. Accounts that are closed are accounts with a zero balance which could have been by payment or administrative or legal cancellation.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year. At the end of September 2013 total collection (all imposition types excluding confiscation orders) was higher than the same point in the previous year and the outstanding balance had reduced since the start of the financial year. On average over the last 12 month 69% of accounts have been either closed or are compliant with payment terms by 12 months after imposition.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

36327

	registered interest
	date	31/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the value was of fines that were (a) issued and (b) uncollected in each of the last four years.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	186157
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The value of fines imposed, collected, cancelled and outstanding for the periods from April 2011 onwards are set out below.</p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Period</p></td><td><p>Value of fines imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fine collected in the same period they were imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fines cancelled in the same period they were imposed</p></td><td><p>Value of fines imposed outstanding at the end of the period</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>April 2011 to December 2011</p></td><td><p>£170,962,169</p></td><td><p>£54,843,753</p></td><td><p>£12,470,347</p></td><td><p>£103,648,069</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2012 to December 2012</p></td><td><p>£273,944,704</p></td><td><p>£70,032,092</p></td><td><p>£17,470,412</p></td><td><p>£186,442,200</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2013 to September 2013 (latest published period)</p></td><td><p>£210,561,372</p></td><td><p>£44,541,677</p></td><td><p>£11,548,807</p></td><td><p>£154,470,888</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The values above only refer to fines and not any other elements of financial impositions such as prosecutor costs, compensation and victim surcharge. Where financial impositions are paid by instalments the fine element is the last part to be paid off after compensation, victim surcharge and prosecutor costs. The values cancelled can relate to legal or administrative cancellations. The value outstanding will include amounts remaining on accounts that are being paid by instalments or were not due for payment by the end of the period specified.</p><p> </p><p>It is not possible to provide data in this format for any period prior to April 2011 as new performance management information was introduced at that time. It is not possible to identify how much of the amounts imposed in 2011 or 2012 remained outstanding by the end of September 2013 (latest published data period) as data is only available for 18 months after the date imposed – after that it is not possible to extract the amount outstanding for a specific period from the total balance outstanding.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year. At the end of September 2013 total collection (all imposition types excluding confiscation orders) was higher than the same point in the previous year and the outstanding balance had reduced since the start of the financial year. On average over the last 12 month 69% of accounts have been either closed or are compliant with payment terms by 12 months after imposition.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

36328

	registered interest
	date	31/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the value is of outstanding fines that were written off in each of the last four years.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	186159
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The amounts of financial impositions administratively cancelled and legally cancelled in each year since 2009-10 are set out in the table below</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Legally Cancelled</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Administratively Cancelled</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009/10</p></td><td><p>£58,277,772</p></td><td><p>£47,398,379</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010/11</p></td><td><p>£62,263,874</p></td><td><p>£50,712,367</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>£63,957,203</p></td><td><p>£63,135,442</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>£62,594,601</p></td><td><p>£75,868,426</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The number of financial impositions administratively cancelled and legally cancelled in each year since 2011/12 are set out in the table below. Data on the number of financial impositions cancelled is not available prior to 2011/12.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Legally Cancelled</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Administratively Cancelled</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>161,455</p></td><td><p>226,955</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>165,195</p></td><td><p>269,486</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>It is not possible to identify the amounts or numbers written off for just the fine element. The amounts above therefore include all elements of financial penalties (excluding confiscation orders): fines, costs, compensation and victim surcharge. The amounts cancelled in a particular year can relate to impositions from that year or any previous year.</p><p> </p><p>Financial penalties are only administratively cancelled after all attempts to collect the amount outstanding have been made, and in accordance with strict cancellation criteria. These penalties can be written back on to the system if more information is found – for instance, a new address for the offender.</p><p> </p><p>Legal cancellations can be applied after the case has been reconsidered by a Judge or Magistrate. Typically, legal cancellations are used where a case has been re-opened and the defendant has been found not guilty, following the presentation of additional information. Legal cancellations can be full or partial remittances of financial penalties.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has carried out a fundamental review of financial penalty accounts, actively targeting accounts to achieve compliance at the earliest point, as well as tackling old accounts, and administratively cancelling them where there is no realistic chance of collection because they do not have enough information to trace the debtors. This explains the increase in the value of administrative cancellations seen in the figures.</p><p> </p><p>This enabled HMCTS to focus resources on increasing collections on accounts which can be enforced, resulting in the record high level of collection in 2012/13.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year. At the end of September 2013 total collection (all imposition types excluding confiscation orders) was higher than the same point in the previous year and the outstanding balance had reduced since the start of the financial year. On average over the last 12 month 69% of accounts have been either closed or are compliant with payment terms by 12 months after imposition.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 186160 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

36329

	registered interest
	date	31/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many outstanding fines were written off in each of the last four years.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	186160
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The amounts of financial impositions administratively cancelled and legally cancelled in each year since 2009-10 are set out in the table below</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Legally Cancelled</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Administratively Cancelled</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009/10</p></td><td><p>£58,277,772</p></td><td><p>£47,398,379</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010/11</p></td><td><p>£62,263,874</p></td><td><p>£50,712,367</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>£63,957,203</p></td><td><p>£63,135,442</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>£62,594,601</p></td><td><p>£75,868,426</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The number of financial impositions administratively cancelled and legally cancelled in each year since 2011/12 are set out in the table below. Data on the number of financial impositions cancelled is not available prior to 2011/12.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Legally Cancelled</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Administratively Cancelled</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>161,455</p></td><td><p>226,955</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>165,195</p></td><td><p>269,486</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>It is not possible to identify the amounts or numbers written off for just the fine element. The amounts above therefore include all elements of financial penalties (excluding confiscation orders): fines, costs, compensation and victim surcharge. The amounts cancelled in a particular year can relate to impositions from that year or any previous year.</p><p> </p><p>Financial penalties are only administratively cancelled after all attempts to collect the amount outstanding have been made, and in accordance with strict cancellation criteria. These penalties can be written back on to the system if more information is found – for instance, a new address for the offender.</p><p> </p><p>Legal cancellations can be applied after the case has been reconsidered by a Judge or Magistrate. Typically, legal cancellations are used where a case has been re-opened and the defendant has been found not guilty, following the presentation of additional information. Legal cancellations can be full or partial remittances of financial penalties.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has carried out a fundamental review of financial penalty accounts, actively targeting accounts to achieve compliance at the earliest point, as well as tackling old accounts, and administratively cancelling them where there is no realistic chance of collection because they do not have enough information to trace the debtors. This explains the increase in the value of administrative cancellations seen in the figures.</p><p> </p><p>This enabled HMCTS to focus resources on increasing collections on accounts which can be enforced, resulting in the record high level of collection in 2012/13.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year. At the end of September 2013 total collection (all imposition types excluding confiscation orders) was higher than the same point in the previous year and the outstanding balance had reduced since the start of the financial year. On average over the last 12 month 69% of accounts have been either closed or are compliant with payment terms by 12 months after imposition.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 186159 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

36331

	registered interest
	date	31/01/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many outstanding fines remained uncollected on 31 December in each of the last four years.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	186162
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>Data on the total number of financial imposition accounts outstanding has only been available since November 2012 so it is not possible to say how many accounts remained outstanding at the end of December for each of the last four years. The available data is set out below.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Date</p></td><td><p>Total number of financial imposition accounts outstanding</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>December 2012</p></td><td><p>1,548,516</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>September 2013 (latest published period)</p></td><td><p>1,371,089</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The numbers above relate to accounts which include fines, prosecutor costs, compensation and victim surcharge. The number of outstanding accounts include those which are being paid by instalments or are not yet due for payment.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year. At the end of September 2013 total value of collection (all imposition types excluding confiscation orders) was higher than the same point in the previous year and the outstanding balance had reduced since the start of the financial year. On average over the last 12 month 69% of accounts have been either closed or are compliant with payment terms by 12 months after imposition.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

42285

	registered interest
	date	10/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average cost was of a (a) jury trial at the Crown Court for (i) either way offences sent by magistrates where their sentencing powers were not deemed sufficient, (ii) either way offences where the defendant has chosen to elect jury trial and (iii) indictable only offences and (b) trial in a magistrates' court for (i) summary only offences and (ii) either way offences in the latest period for which figures are available.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	191282
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>The information requested is not currently available in full. An analysis of criminal court costs is based on average timings from Activity Based Costing allocations models. Some of the timings in the models are based on a timing survey, conducted in a representative sample of courts. Undertaking a new survey to support an analysis of costs in a different way to that currently available could only be achieved at disproportionate cost.</p><p>Some of the information is available. There are a number of different ways costs of cases can be estimated, depending on how indirect costs are apportioned. Estimates below are based on 2012/13 costs (up-rated to 2013/14 prices).</p><p> </p><p>Costs at the Crown Court are analysed by offence type (criminal damage, burglary, drug offences etc) rather than by how the offence has come to be heard in the Crown Court. Estimates are based on average trial lengths – individual trials for any given case may be longer or shorter. The lower and upper trial cost estimates shown below are the weighted average of upper and lower estimates for all either way or indictable offence types.</p><p>Summary offences in the magistrates' court have been split into motoring and non-motoring offence types.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Estimated Average Costs </strong></p></td><td><p>Lower</p></td><td><p>Higher</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>In the Crown Court (Either way or indictable trial in the Crown Court)</p></td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>Committed for trial</p></td><td><p><strong>£5,500</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£6,400</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Sent for trail</p></td><td><p><strong>£9,500</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£10,500</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>In the Magistrates Court</p></td><td><p>Lower</p></td><td><p>Higher</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Summary motoring trial</p></td><td><p><strong>£500</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£600</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Summary non-motoring trial</p></td><td><p><strong>£1,000</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£1,300</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Either way trial in the magistrates' court</p></td><td><p><strong>£1,300</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£1,700</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>These figures do not include legal aid costs.</p><p> </p><p>Costs shown to the nearest £100<ins>.</ins></p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

42289

	registered interest
	date	10/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many defendants charged with each offence type were sent to the Crown Court for sentence by magistrates in each of the last five years.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	191271
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>The answers to both questions are contained in the following tables:</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 191270 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara attachment 1 file name 191270, 191271.doc title Table 1&2
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

42291

	registered interest
	date	10/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average cost was of an either way office case dealt with at the Crown Court where (a) a guilty plea was entered at the magistrates' court and (b) a guilty plea was entered on the day of trial at the Crown Court in the latest period for which figures are available.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	191272
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>There are a number of different ways costs of cases can be estimated, depending on how indirect costs are apportioned, resulting in a range of cost estimates for these cases. The latest period for which data is available is 2012/13 (up-rated to 2013/14 prices).</p><p>a) The cost of an either way guilty plea entered at the Magistrates Court is estimated to be between £210 and £270 (to the nearest £10).</p><p>b) A guilty plea entered on the day of a trial at the Crown court would result in a cracked trial. The cost of a cracked trial in the Crown court is estimated to be between £1,200 and £2,000 (to the nearest £100).</p><p>These figures do not include legal aid costs.</p><p>Sentencing Council Guidelines to the judiciary encourage early guilty pleas by setting out a scale of ‘credit' for a guilty plea to be applied that varies from a reduction of one third in any sentence for an early plea, to 10% for a guilty plea entered at the point of trial.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

42292

	registered interest
	date	10/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many defendants (a) elected jury trial at the Crown Court for either way offences where magistrates had accepted jurisdiction and deemed the case to be suitable for summary trial and (b) were sent to the Crown Court for trial by magistrates declining jurisdiction over the case in each of the last three years.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	191270
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>The answers to both questions are contained in the following tables:</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 191271 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara attachment 1 file name 191270, 191271.doc title Table 1&2
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

42556

	registered interest
	date	11/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of the action by barristers on (a) 6 January 2014 and (b) 7 March 2014; and what his policy is on imposing a costs sanction on the barristers involved.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	191468
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/04/2014 answer text <p>We have not yet made an estimate of the cost to the taxpayer of the action by barristers on 6 January and 7 March 2014. The question of costs is a matter for judges to consider in individual cases under the provisions set out in the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 (as amended).</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 01/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

42822

	registered interest
	date	12/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of (a) magistrates' courts, (b) County courts and (c) County Court money claims centres use higher-rate telephone numbers.
	tabling member constituency	Birkenhead
	tabling member printed	Mr Frank Field
	uin	191689
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The information held centrally on how many and what proportion of (a) magistrates' courts, (b) County courts and (c) County Court money claims centres use higher-rate telephone numbers is as follows:</p><p>(a) Magistrates' courts: 33 out of 330 courts</p><p>(b) County Courts: 17 out of 216 courts</p><p>(c) The County Court Bulk Centre in Northampton which centrally</p><p>manages money claims, also uses higher rate telephone numbers.</p><p>Some of the individual numbers are used for more than one court.</p><p>As stated in previous answers to parliamentary questions, the Department's approach is not to use 084 or 087 for non-geographic numbers and instead, wherever possible, to assign 0300 numbers, for which the tariff is similar to calling an 01 or 02 (geographic) number, whether the caller is using a fixed line or a mobile phone —see: <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm130423/text/130423w0004.htm#130423w0004. htm_wqn27" target="_blank">http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm130423/text/130423w0004.htm#130423w0004. htm_wqn27</a></p><p>and</p><p><a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?ids2013-11-20a.175002.h&amp;s=Vaz+0845#g175002.q0" target="_blank">http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?ids2013-11-20a.175002.h&amp;s=Vaz+0845#g175002.q0</a></p><p>The number of 08 numbers used by the department has fallen by 55% since December 2009.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 10/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	478 label Biography information for Lord Field of Birkenhead

43143

	registered interest
	date	13/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how much was levied in fines by each magistrates court in Greater Manchester in each of the last five years; what proportion of such fines were written off by each court; and what proportion of such fines were collected.
	tabling member constituency	Denton and Reddish
	tabling member printed	Andrew Gwynne
	uin	192142
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>It is not possible to identify the amounts imposed, written off and collected for individual magistrates courts as data on fines imposed is recorded by local accounting divisions. The only way data for individual courts could be obtained is to carry out a manual search of all fine accounts.</p><p> </p><p>The total amounts imposed, written off and collected in the Greater Manchester accounting division are set out below:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total imposed</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total administratively cancelled</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total legally cancelled</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total collected</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2008/09</p></td><td><p>£19,635,012</p></td><td><p>£1,902,853</p></td><td><p>£2,805,105</p></td><td><p>£11,673,192</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009/10</p></td><td><p>£19,267,431</p></td><td><p>£1,973,017</p></td><td><p>£3,019,911</p></td><td><p>£11,802,052</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010/11</p></td><td><p>£22,558,446</p></td><td><p>£1,229,895</p></td><td><p>£2,847,562</p></td><td><p>£12,063,589</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>£19,125,753</p></td><td><p>£2,216,073</p></td><td><p>£3,933,432</p></td><td><p>£12,265,100</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>£21,654,640</p></td><td><p>£2,204,046</p></td><td><p>£4,586,675</p></td><td><p>£12,952,842</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The amounts above include all elements of financial impositions (excluding confiscation orders): fines, costs, compensation and victim surcharge. The amounts cancelled or collected in a particular year can relate to impositions from that year or any previous year.</p><p> </p><p>Financial penalties are only administratively cancelled after all attempts to collect the amount outstanding have been made, and in accordance with strict cancellation criteria. These penalties can be written back on to the system if more information is found – for instance, a new address for the offender.</p><p> </p><p>Legal cancellations can be applied after the case has been reconsidered by a Judge or Magistrate. Typically, legal cancellations are used where a case has been re-opened and the defendant has been found not guilty, following the presentation of additional information. Legal cancellations can be full or partial remittances of financial penalties.</p><p> </p><p>The table below sets out how much of the value imposed in Greater Manchester in the 2011/12 and 2012/13 financial years was collected or cancelled by the end of the same financial year which it was imposed. This data is only available from April 2011 onwards.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Imposed</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Collected</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Cancelled (administrative and legal)</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>£19,125,753</p></td><td><p>£6,036,385</p></td><td><p>£1,832,554</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>£21,654,640</p></td><td><p>£6,537,941</p></td><td><p>£3,111,387</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The amounts above again include all elements of financial impositions. The balance amount imposed that is remaining at the end of the financial year will include amounts that were being paid by instalments or were not due for payment by that time.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Total collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year. At the end of September 2013 total collection (all imposition types excluding confiscation orders) across HMCTS was higher than the same point in the previous year and the outstanding balance had reduced since the start of the financial year. On average over the last 12 month 69% of accounts have been either closed or are compliant with payment terms by 12 months after imposition.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1506 label Biography information for Andrew Gwynne

43149

	registered interest
	date	13/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how much in victim surcharge has been imposed by adult courts since October 2012; and how much of that figure has been collected to date.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	191969
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The amount of victim surcharge imposed and collected from October 2012 to September 2013 (latest published period) is set out below:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Imposition month</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Amount imposed</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Amount collected by end of September 2013</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>October 2012</p></td><td><p>£1,253,491</p></td><td><p>£826,583</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>November 2012</p></td><td><p>£1,460,874</p></td><td><p>£941,311</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>December 2012</p></td><td><p>£1,263,756</p></td><td><p>£788,671</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2013</p></td><td><p>£1,900,543</p></td><td><p>£1,158,226</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>February 2013</p></td><td><p>£1,869,900</p></td><td><p>£1,068,110</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>March 2013</p></td><td><p>£2,086,393</p></td><td><p>£1,139,143</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>April 2013</p></td><td><p>£2,424,548</p></td><td><p>£1,240,960</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>May 2013</p></td><td><p>£2,543,344</p></td><td><p>£1,201,270</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>June 2013</p></td><td><p>£2,556,998</p></td><td><p>£1,096,358</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>July 2013</p></td><td><p>£2,982,204</p></td><td><p>£1,096,130</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>August 2013</p></td><td><p>£2,707,508</p></td><td><p>£776,618</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>September 2013</p></td><td><p>£2,626,937</p></td><td><p>£357,217</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£25,676,496</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£11,690,597</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The balance of the amount imposed that is remaining at the end of the period will include amounts that are being paid by instalments or were not due for payment by that time. The closer to the point of imposition the greater the proportion will be that remains outstanding as many offenders will be paying by instalments.</p><p> </p><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) takes the issue of financial penalty enforcement very seriously and is working to ensure that clamping down on defaulters is a continued priority nationwide. HMCTS actively pursues all outstanding impositions until certain they cannot be collected. Total collection reached an all time high at the end of 2012/13 and collection has continued to rise in this financial year.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS are actively seeking an external provider for the future delivery of compliance and enforcement services. This will bring the necessary investment and innovation to significantly improve the collection of criminal financial penalties and reduce the cost of the service to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

43441

	registered interest
	date	17/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many parents represented themselves at court in child proceedings in the most recent period for which figures are available.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	192290
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>Information on the legal representation of parties in family courts is available at a national level in table 2.4 of Court Statistics Quarterly the latest edition of which is available at this link:</p><p> </p><p><a title="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/court-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2013" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/court-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2013" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/court-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2013</a></p><p> </p><p>However, you should note that this information relates to whether parties have a recorded representative, rather than whether they are litigants in person. It is also based on the number of disposals, rather than parents, and cases may of course involve multiple disposals.</p><p> </p><p>Parties with no legal representation are not a new phenomenon in our courts. Judges are used to helping persons with no legal representation, including explaining procedures and what is expected of them. We have also taken steps to help people who either want or have to represent themselves in court, including publishing a revised guide for separating parents and increased training for judges. The link to the guide is:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/cb7-eng.pdf" target="_blank">http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/cb7-eng.pdf</a></p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 03/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

43444

	registered interest
	date	17/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average length of time between judgement and sentencing in criminal trials in England was in the latest period for which figures are available; and what assessment he has made of the trends in the time taken.
	tabling member constituency	Sefton Central
	tabling member printed	Bill Esterson
	uin	192266
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/04/2014 answer text <p>HMCTS can only answer this question for trials in the Crown Court. The case management database for magistrates' courts does not hold the date of conviction in a way we can calculate the time from conviction to sentence for all defendants so the only way we could answer the question would be to manually check each case file which would incur disproportionate costs.</p><p>The Crown Court database does and Table 1 below shows the average length between the latest conviction date in a trial and the date of sentence. The trend has seen the time between conviction and sentence falling from an average of 35.8 calendar days in 2007-08 to 24.6 calendar days in the first half of 2013-14. When a trial has more than one offence the jury may not reach verdicts against all on the same day, and the sentence cannot take place until all offences have a verdict.</p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="2"><p>Table 1 -Average length between conviction and sentence in Crown Court centres in England for defendants sentenced between April and September 2013</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Period</p></td><td><p>Average</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>April to September 2013</p></td><td><p>24.6 calendar days</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012-13</p></td><td><p>28.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011-12</p></td><td><p>28.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>30.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009-10</p></td><td><p>32.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2008-09</p></td><td><p>34.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2007-08</p></td><td><p>35.8</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>Notes:</p><ol type="1"><li>The average number of calendar days between the latest jury conviction date and the earliest substantial sentence date.</li><li>Includes cases where the defendant changes their plea to guilty during the trial.</li><li>This is internal management information run specifically to answer this question.</li></ol><p> </p><p>The judiciary are able to sentence following conviction without the need for additional hearings as a result of initiatives currently in place. The judicially lead early guilty plea scheme aims to have guilty plea cases concluded at a single hearing. Similarly the probation service are able to provide reports on the day of conviction to facilitate the sentencing of the defendant.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 01/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	4061 label Biography information for Bill Esterson

43825

	registered interest
	date	18/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many breaches of security have been reported at (a) HM Courts Service, (b) the Land Registry, (c) the National Offender Management Service, (d) the National Archives, (e) the Office of the Public Guardian and (f) the Tribunals Service in each year since May 2010; and what procedures each agency follows when a breach of security involves the disclosure of personal data.
	tabling member constituency	Barnsley Central
	tabling member printed	Dan Jarvis
	uin	192730
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>The table below provides the number of centrally recorded security incidents (breaches of security resulting in actual or potential harm) that have occurred during each financial year since 1 April 2010.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td> </td><td><p>01/04/2010-31/03/2011</p></td><td><p>01/04/2011-31/03/2012</p></td><td><p>01/04/2012-31/03/2013</p></td><td><p>01/04/2013-31/12/2013</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p><p>HM Courts Service*</p></td><td><p> </p><p>2,845</p></td><td><p> </p><p>-</p></td><td><p> </p><p>-</p></td><td><p> </p><p>-</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p><p>Tribunals Service*</p></td><td><p> </p><p>577</p></td><td><p> </p><p>-</p></td><td><p> </p><p>-</p></td><td><p> </p><p>-</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service*</p></td><td><p> </p><p>-</p></td><td><p> </p><p>5,077</p></td><td><p> </p><p>3,101</p></td><td><p> </p><p>2,421</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Office of the Public Guardian</p></td><td><p> </p><p>679</p></td><td><p> </p><p>446</p></td><td><p> </p><p>485</p></td><td><p> </p><p>389</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p><p>The National Archives</p></td><td><p> </p><p>3</p></td><td><p> </p><p>1</p></td><td><p> </p><p>5</p></td><td><p> </p><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>The National Offender Management Service **</p></td><td><p> </p><p>8,287</p></td><td><p> </p><p>9,298</p></td><td><p> </p><p>10,052</p></td><td><p> </p><p>8,492</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>*HM Courts Service and the Tribunals Service merged in April 2011 and became HM Courts and Tribunals Service and therefore these details are not recorded separately.</p><p>** Includes the number of incidents involving physical security in prisons.</p><p> </p><p>Responsibility for HM Land Registry was transferred to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills in July 2011 and therefore the Ministry of Justice does not hold this information.</p><p> </p><p>The figures include a wide range of types of incident, including loss of IT equipment (which would usually be password protected or encrypted to protect the information); verbal abuse and threats to court staff, judiciary and members of the public; and a wide variety of incidents in prisons.</p><p> </p><p>The Department and its agencies apply robust incident management processes, including a requirement for staff to report breaches resulting in potential harm/loss to assets (information, people, buildings and equipment).</p><p> </p><p>When a security incident involving the disclosure of personal data is identified prompt action is taken locally to limit harm and residual action is then taken to seek to alleviate further recurrence.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	4243 label Biography information for Dan Jarvis

44512

	registered interest
	date	21/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of extending entitlement to (a) assistance with civil and criminal legal aid, (b) remission for court fees and (c) access to the assisted prison visits programme to all claimants of universal credit once universal credit has been fully rolled out.
	tabling member constituency	East Ham
	tabling member printed	Stephen Timms
	uin	193245
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>I will write to the Rt hon. Member for East Ham regarding the issues he has raised on legal aid and remission of court fees. On the assisted prison visits, we are liaising further with the Department for Work &amp; Pensions.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 09/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms

44812

	registered interest
	date	24/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 29 January 2013, Official Report, column 772W, on Judicial Review, what further assessment has been made of the reasons for the increase in the number of applications for judicial review.
	tabling member constituency	Brent Central
	tabling member printed	Sarah Teather
	uin	193293
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>The use of judicial review more than tripled between 2000 and 2013, from around 4,300 applications to around 15,700. The increase has been driven mainly by immigration and asylum cases but civil judicial reviews have increased by around 27% over the same period, from 1,745 in 2000 to 2,210 in 2013.</p><p> </p><p>In 2012 only around 1,400 of 7,600 applications considered for permission, including at an oral renewal, were granted permission to proceed to a final hearing. Between 1 October 2012 and 31 December 2013 around 30% of judicial reviews which reached the permission stage or oral renewal were found to be totally without merit.</p><p> </p><p>The governemnt is determined to improve the judicial review process. The rationale for the Government's reforms is set out in ‘Judicial review: further proposals for reform – the Government response' (<a href="https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/judicial-review" target="_blank">https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/judicial-review</a>). The Government is determined to improve the judicial review process so that it is not open to abuse and arguable cases can proceed quickly to final resolution.</p><p> </p><p>The Government is clear that judicial review is, and will remain, an important means to ensure the actions of Government and other bodies are lawful.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1170 label Biography information for Sarah Teather

44813

	registered interest
	date	24/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, for what reasons Worksop Courthouse is planned to close.
	tabling member constituency	Bassetlaw
	tabling member printed	John Mann
	uin	193281
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>There are no plans to close the courthouse at Worksop. A consultation is currently underway on potential changes to listing arrangements at Worksop Magistrates' Court. The consultation commenced on 19 March 2014 and closes on 30 April 2014 and all responses will be taken into account before any decision is made.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1387 label Biography information for Lord Mann

44814

	registered interest
	date	24/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people in Northern Ireland per 10,000 of the population were prosecuted for non-payment of the television licence fee in each of the last three years.
	tabling member constituency	East Londonderry
	tabling member printed	Mr Gregory Campbell
	uin	193401
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>My Department's Court Proceedings database holds information on criminal justice statistics only in England and Wales. Criminal Justice Statistics in Northern Ireland are a matter for the Department of Justice in Northern Ireland, which the Member will need to contact directly.</p><p> </p><p>The offence of using a TV receiver without a valid licence carries a maximum penalty of a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale (£1,000). Failure to pay such a fine can lead, following enforcement action and as a last resort, to committal to prison for fine default for a maximum of 28 days.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1409 label Biography information for Mr Gregory Campbell

44816

	registered interest
	date	24/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will seek an estimate from the (a) Bailiwick of Jersey and (b) Bailiwick of Guernsey of the value of Russian (a) financial and (b) non-financial assets held in each such territory.
	tabling member constituency	Mid Sussex
	tabling member printed	Nicholas Soames
	uin	193345
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Dependencies are not part of the UK but are self-governing dependencies of the Crown. This means they have their own directly elected legislative assemblies, administrative, fiscal and legal systems and their own courts of law. It is therefore not for the UK to extend the application of the Sanctions set out in the Council Regulation (EU) 269/2014. Equivalent measures have been implemented by the Crown Dependencies, who have kept Her Majesty's Government updated about their activities in this area.</p><p> </p><p>Her Majesty's Government does not routinely request information on the value of particular assets held in the Crown Dependencies.</p><p> </p><p>The UK and the Crown Dependencies recognise the importance of working together to promote the application of high international standards and implementing sanctions and asset freezing measures.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 193346 question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	116 label Biography information for Lord Soames of Fletching

44817

	registered interest
	date	24/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he take steps to extend the requirement to apply sanctions set out in Council Regulation (EU) 269/2014 to the (a) Bailiwick of Jersey and (b) Bailiwick of Guernsey.
	tabling member constituency	Mid Sussex
	tabling member printed	Nicholas Soames
	uin	193346
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Dependencies are not part of the UK but are self-governing dependencies of the Crown. This means they have their own directly elected legislative assemblies, administrative, fiscal and legal systems and their own courts of law. It is therefore not for the UK to extend the application of the Sanctions set out in the Council Regulation (EU) 269/2014. Equivalent measures have been implemented by the Crown Dependencies, who have kept Her Majesty's Government updated about their activities in this area.</p><p> </p><p>Her Majesty's Government does not routinely request information on the value of particular assets held in the Crown Dependencies.</p><p> </p><p>The UK and the Crown Dependencies recognise the importance of working together to promote the application of high international standards and implementing sanctions and asset freezing measures.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 193345 question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	116 label Biography information for Lord Soames of Fletching

44820

	registered interest
	date	24/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with which countries the EU as a legal personality is currently negotiating co-operation agreements in the field of justice and home affairs.
	tabling member constituency	Esher and Walton
	tabling member printed	Mr Dominic Raab
	uin	193454
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/04/2014 answer text <p>I refer to the response provided by the Minister for Europe on 24 March [PQ 191707 Col 70W]. In addition, JHA agreements have been concluded between the EU and Brazil, Ukraine and Moldova during the course of this Government, which build on the borders and immigration aspects of the Schengen system, in which the UK does not participate.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 01/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	4007 label Biography information for Dominic Raab

44821

	registered interest
	date	24/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with which countries the EU as a legal personality has concluded co-operation agreements in the field of justice and home affairs.
	tabling member constituency	Esher and Walton
	tabling member printed	Mr Dominic Raab
	uin	193455
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/04/2014 answer text <p>I refer to the response provided by the Minister for Europe on 24 March [PQ 191707 Col 70W]. In addition, JHA agreements have been concluded between the EU and Brazil, Ukraine and Moldova during the course of this Government, which build on the borders and immigration aspects of the Schengen system, in which the UK does not participate.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 01/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	4007 label Biography information for Dominic Raab

45110

	registered interest
	date	25/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what calculations were used to calculate the mean fee income for full-time criminal barristers published by his Department on 2 January 2014; and for what reasons VAT was included in the estimate of barristers' earnings.
	tabling member constituency	Monmouth
	tabling member printed	David T. C. Davies
	uin	193702
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>Figures provided in the statistical publication released on the 2nd January 2014 are available at <a title="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/legal-aid-statistics-barrister-fee-income-from-public-sources-201213" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/legal-aid-statistics-barrister-fee-income-from-public-sources-201213" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/legal-aid-statistics-barrister-fee-income-from-public-sources-201213</a> and show that when including all 4,931 criminal barristers' payments, the mean average payment for 2012/13 was £72,010. This includes those barristers that may have provided legal assistance in only a small number of instances within this time period, and payments from both the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Legal Aid Agency (LAA). The release also contains information on the data and methodology used.</p><p> </p><p>The statistics provided in the publication and supporting documents included VAT and other additional costs due to the structure of the data obtained from the administrative systems within LAA, and also those provided by the CPS were aggregated figures that already included VAT. The basis of the calculations were set out in the publication.</p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1545 label Biography information for David T C Davies

45328

	registered interest
	date	26/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of employees in his Department of what (a) Civil Service pay grade and (b) gender work (i) reduced hours, (ii) flexi-time, (iii) from home, (iv) a compressed working week, (v) job share, (vi) term-time only and (vii) part-time.
	tabling member constituency	Manchester Central
	tabling member printed	Lucy Powell
	uin	193969
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice and its executive agencies HM Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS), National Offender Management Service (NOMS), Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) and Legal Aid Agency (LAA) offer flexible working opportunities to all employees, not just those with family or caring responsibilities</p><p>The table at annex A shows the proportion of officials within the Minister of Justice with flexible working arrangements</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 03/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara attachment 1 file name 193969 - Powell - Annex A.doc title Annex A
	tabling member	4263 label Biography information for Lucy Powell

45335

	registered interest
	date	26/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to his article published in the Daily Mail on 6 September 2013, what the evidential basis was for his statement that countless left-wing campaigners are using the judicial review system as a promotional tool.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	193822
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The rationale for the Government's reforms is set out in ‘Judicial review: further proposals for reform – the Government response' (<a href="https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/judicial-review" target="_blank">https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/judicial-review</a>). The Government is determined to improve the judicial review process so that it is not open to abuse and arguable cases can proceed quickly to final resolution.</p><p> </p><p>Most of the Government's reforms to judicial review are being taken forward through the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill which will be subject to the full and proper scrutiny of Parliament.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara previous answer version 3889 answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

45464

	registered interest
	date	26/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department is (a) undertaking or (b) plans to undertake a review of the check-off union subscription provision.
	tabling member constituency	Leicester South
	tabling member printed	Jonathan Ashworth
	uin	194044
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>Arrangements of this sort are kept under review.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 08/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	4244 label Biography information for Jonathan Ashworth

45595

	registered interest
	date	27/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total amount of fines levied on but uncollected from people found guilty of non-payment of (a) a television licence, (b) vehicle excise duty and (c) council tax was on 1 March 2014.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	194111
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>It is not possible to identify from Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals systems the value of fines that remain outstanding for specific offences. This information could only be provided at disproportionate cost as identifying this would require a manual search of all fine accounts.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

45596

	registered interest
	date	27/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average fine was for people found guilty of non-payment of (a) a television licence, (b) vehicle excise duty and (c) council tax in each of the last four years.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	194112
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>The average amount of the number of fines issued to defendants proceeded against in magistrates' courts and found guilty and sentenced at all courts for installing or using a television receiver without the appropriate licence, in England and Wales, from 2008 to 2012, can be viewed in Table 1.</p><p> </p><p>The average amount of the number of fines issued to defendants proceeded against in magistrates' courts and found guilty and sentenced at all courts for keeping a motor vehicle on the highway without a current vehicle excise licence, in England and Wales, from 2008 to 2012, can be viewed in Table 2</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Failure to pay council tax is not a criminal offence so cannot be dealt with by a fine.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara attachment 1 file name 194112 - Khan - Tv licence - table 1 for minister.XLS title Table 1 2 file name 194112 - Khan - Tv licence - Table 2 - Response for minister.XLS title Table 2 question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

45598

	registered interest
	date	27/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 3 December 2013, Official Report, columns 652-3W, on special educational needs, whether his Department has any plans in future to commence publishing figures on the proportion of hearings where (a) local authorities and (b) parents were legally represented.
	tabling member constituency	Birmingham, Selly Oak
	tabling member printed	Steve McCabe
	uin	194156
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice and HM Courts &amp; Tribunals Service (HMCTS) publish data on the First-tier Tribunal Special Educational Needs &amp; Disability (FtT SEND) regularly in a quarterly internet publication which includes data on a number of other Tribunals. Data for the academic year September 2012 to August 2013 were published in December 2013 and can be found at:</p><p>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tribunal-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2013</p><p>The published data do not provide information on representation at hearings because. The current IT system does not have the facility to record details of legal representation at the actual hearing. To change this position would incur cost which could not be justified by any benefit to HMCTS. Therefore, there are no plans to collect this information.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 03/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	298 label Biography information for Steve McCabe

45693

	registered interest
	date	27/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many of the people imprisoned in 2012 for non-payment of fines relating to television licence evasion had other unpaid fines for other offences; and how many outstanding fines on average such people had.
	tabling member constituency	Manchester, Withington
	tabling member printed	Mr John Leech
	uin	194244
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>It is not possible to identify from Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals systems the original offences of people sent to prison for non payment of fines or how many other fines they may have had. This information could only be provided at disproportionate cost as identifying this would require a manual search of all closed and live fine accounts.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1543 label Biography information for Mr John Leech

45935

	registered interest
	date	31/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate he has made of the proportion of offences where the victim surcharge is ordered and there is no victim.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	194381
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice does not collate the information in the manner requested, and it is not possible to identify the amount of victim surcharge collected in relation to offences where there was no victim.</p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice Court Proceedings Database holds information on defendants proceeded against, found guilty and sentenced for criminal offences in England and Wales. This database holds information on offences provided by the statutes under which proceedings are brought but not the specific circumstances of each case. This centrally held information does not include details of the amount of victim surcharge imposed for the majority of cases. Below is a link to our most recent quarterly bulletin.</p><p> </p><p><a title="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/282983/1-executive-summary-tables.xls" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/282983/1-executive-summary-tables.xls" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/282983/1-executive-summary-tables.xls</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 08/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

45954

	registered interest
	date	31/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how much in legal aid claims has been paid to Leigh Day and Public Interest Lawyers in each of the last three years.
	tabling member constituency	Warrington South
	tabling member printed	David Mowat
	uin	194326
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The net payments to these firms over the past three years are shown in the table below.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Public Interest Lawyers</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Leigh Day &amp; Co</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010/11</p></td><td><p>£439,268.02</p></td><td><p>£1,182,080.21</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>£331,238.85</p></td><td><p>£1,216,888.66</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>£54,387.48</p></td><td><p>£569,730.45</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>These payments cover all work undertaken by the firms under legal aid. The payments made will be offset by recoupment on successful cases where the opponent has paid the costs.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 09/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	4080 label Biography information for David Mowat

46144

	registered interest
	date	31/03/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many cases were dealt with in magistrates' courts in 2013 (a) in total and (b) for non-payment of a television licence.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	194495
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>Statistics on prosecutions, convictions and sentencing for calendar year 2013, including those of installing or viewing a television receiver without the appropriate licence, are planned for publication in May 2014 as part of the Criminal Justice Statistics annual publication.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 28/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

46320

	registered interest
	date	01/04/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will take steps to reform civil procedure rules to clarify courts' powers to strike out cases due to exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Poplar and Limehouse
	tabling member printed	Jim Fitzpatrick
	uin	194773
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.</p><p> </p><p>No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.</p><p>The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 - worth £441m - as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.</p><p>As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 194759 194774 194804 194805 194806 194807 question first answered 10/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	197 label Biography information for Jim Fitzpatrick

46321

	registered interest
	date	01/04/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many insurance fraud cases were struck out due to exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims in the last year for which figures are available.
	tabling member constituency	Poplar and Limehouse
	tabling member printed	Jim Fitzpatrick
	uin	194774
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.</p><p> </p><p>No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.</p><p>The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 - worth £441m - as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.</p><p>As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 194759 194773 194804 194805 194806 194807 question first answered 10/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	197 label Biography information for Jim Fitzpatrick

46331

	registered interest
	date	01/04/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate his Department has made of the effect on insurance premiums of personal injury insurance fraud in the last year for which information is available; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Poplar and Limehouse
	tabling member printed	Jim Fitzpatrick
	uin	194759
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.</p><p> </p><p>No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.</p><p>The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 - worth £441m - as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.</p><p>As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 194773 194774 194804 194805 194806 194807 question first answered 10/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	197 label Biography information for Jim Fitzpatrick

46351

	registered interest
	date	01/04/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will take steps to reform civil procedure rules in a similar manner to the Republic of Ireland's Civil Liabilities and Court Act 2004 to tackle third party insurance fraud.
	tabling member constituency	Poplar and Limehouse
	tabling member printed	Jim Fitzpatrick
	uin	194804
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.</p><p> </p><p>No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.</p><p>The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 - worth £441m - as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.</p><p>As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 194759 194773 194774 194805 194806 194807 question first answered 10/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	197 label Biography information for Jim Fitzpatrick

46352

	registered interest
	date	01/04/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make resources available for a project by the Law Commission investigating the question of fraud by victims of personal injury.
	tabling member constituency	Poplar and Limehouse
	tabling member printed	Jim Fitzpatrick
	uin	194805
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.</p><p> </p><p>No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.</p><p>The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 - worth £441m - as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.</p><p>As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 194759 194773 194774 194804 194806 194807 question first answered 10/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
	tabling member	197 label Biography information for Jim Fitzpatrick