Grieving families, pensioners with dementia, and even dead people have been wrongly prosecuted in Britain’s secretive fast-track courts, a major Evening Standard/ITV News investigation has found.
Exclusive analysis by a panel of barristers of a sample of prosecutions in the controversial Single Justice Procedure (SJP) concluded three quarters of cases should never have gone through the court. These included cases brought against sick and vulnerable defendants.
A mother grieving the death of her baby daughter who was prosecuted for accidentally let her car insurance lapse for a single day has now spoken out alongside a top judge, calling for urgent reform of the SJP system.
Our investigation has uncovered criminal cases brought against women for not paying the TV Licence when they were fleeing domestic violence, as well as cancer patients and sick pensioners taken to court when bills went unpaid.
In at least two cases, people were convicted in the fast-track courts despite the fact they had died.
Former Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, who oversaw the criminal courts of England and Wales when the Single Justice Procedure was created in 2015, said reform is now “overdue”.
“There’s a need for a serious and fundamental review of the process”, said Lord Thomas, after reviewing the panel of barristers’ analysis, adding that he is concerned about the SJP system continuing in its current form.
“Fixing this really is not difficult. It really is something that the Ministry and the prosecuting authorities ought to consider with a degree of urgency.”
Lord Thomas called for solutions including opening up the SJP courts to public scrutiny, prosecutors being made to read mitigation letters, and an overhaul of the information provided to defendants so they fully understand their rights.
The Labour government says it is “reviewing” SJP but has made no public announcements, and now faces intense pressure to bring change to a system that magistrates have already said is broken.
She wrote a letter to the court, explaining her tragic circumstances, but ended up with a criminal conviction nonetheless as prosecutors – who have the power to withdraw a case – did not see her heartbreaking story thanks to the speed and design of the Single Justice Procedure.
“The system is clearly not working”, she said, speaking on what would have been Scarlett’s first birthday.
“I feel insulted – Scarlett’s death wasn't acknowledged in my eyes, because if it was I don't think there's any way that a judge would have said that I should have been convicted for that.”
The Single Justice Procedure allows magistrates to decide on criminal cases in private and based on written evidence alone, in a system that has been criticised as “conveyor belt justice”.
The Evening Standard/ITV News panel of expert barristers were unanimous that Jenny’s case should not have ended in a criminal conviction, and they assessed fifty more SJP cases – brought by the DVLA and TV Licensing - where there had been strong personal mitigation. This included pensioners with dementia, care home residents, and people with severe mental health struggles.
In almost three quarters of the cases they assessed in detail, the barristers concluded there was no public interest in bringing a prosecution.
In addition, the exclusive analysis found almost two thirds of cases would have ended differently for defendants if they had been dealt with in open court with legal representation, rather than in private in the fast-track Single Justice Procedure.
In one case, a 90-year-old pensioner was prosecuted over unpaid car tax and pleaded for “leniency”, setting out how his wife with severe dementia often collects up unopened letters and he must have missed the payment reminder letter. But he was still convicted.
A case was pursued by the DVLA against an 85-year-old woman who was in a care home, despite an explanation of her ailing state from her children.
Another woman found herself being prosecuted for not keeping up with TV Licence payments after her father died, when she was suffering from a breakdown and a relapse of multiple sclerosis.
“If cases like this are thrown up, you need to examine the process fundamentally and see what can be done which will make everyone have confidence that this system of justice provides justice that is fair”, said Lord Thomas.
He added it is “disappointing” that the system has not undergone a fundamental review already, despite years of revelations by The Standard of injustices, harsh treatment, and unlawful prosecutions. He backed a 12-point plan for reform published by the Magistrates Association nearly six months ago.
Magistrates returned a damning assessment of the system, which had been introduced in 2015 in a package of cost-saving measures. They want greater transparency, feel rushed into decisions, and – crucially – say prosecutors must read mitigation letters before any case is decided on.
Magistrates Association chief executive, Tom Franklin, said there had been a “muted” response from government to their call for reform.
“It is so important that the justice system does have humanity, that it remembers that it is real people that are involved in this and it's real people's lives”, he said.
“Particularly for vulnerable defendants, there are cases that are being prosecuted where there is at least a very, very reasonable argument that those cases shouldn't come to court.”
Asked how dead defendants could end up being convicted, he said the system should be reviewed to identify the flaws.
“Clearly it shouldn't be the case that that happened and needs to be looked at as to whether checks need to be improved to make sure that people who are prosecuted are not deceased as well”, he said.
The Standard’s reporting has uncovered the reality of the Single Justice Procedure which handles up to 40,000 criminal cases each month. Revelations including hearings in private which last just 45 seconds and children being prosecuted unlawfully, while a slew of unfair convictions have been overturned.
Last month, our reporting of widespread misuse of the SJP system by train companies, using the wrong laws to prosecute defendants, led to a decision that up to 74,000 train fare evasion prosecutions would be cancelled.
Responding to the investigation, the government said it is “reviewing what more can be done to support vulnerable defendants, as well as how to improve oversight and regulation.”
The Ministry of Justice spokesperson added that it is for prosecutors to decide whether to use SJP.
DVLA and TV Licensing both said efforts are made to avoid prosecutions, including sending letters to people suspected of not paying bills, and they rely on magistrates to highlight important pieces of mitigation.
“A Single Justice Procedure notice will only be issued when we have exhausted all other enforcement routes, including issuing multiple items of correspondence, to which the customer can respond to DVLA with their mitigation”, said a DVLA spokesperson.
"Once progressed to SJP, any defendant can request a hearing in open court, but those pleading guilty via SJP, including those with mitigating action, are considered by a magistrate. These can be referred back to DVLA but whether or not to do so is a decision taken by the magistrate."
A TV Licensing spokesperson said all cases it brings to court are a “last resort” and “subject to an evidential and public interest test”.
“We give customers a number of opportunities to tell us about personal circumstances which may significantly affect their ability to stay licensed before and during the prosecution process, and we would encourage people to engage with us as early as possible so we can properly assess the information given.
“Where appropriate, we have the ability to halt a prosecution or overturn a conviction if we are made aware of new and compelling information.”
The government said prosecutions against defendants who have died become void and it is for prosecutors to inform courts if someone is deceased, while the DVLA said it relies on family notification of deaths to update vehicle ownership records.
