UK Government Closed After Initial Enquiries Search on PHSO website

HM Courts and Tribunals Service

P-002295 · Statement · Decision date: 21 November 2023 · View HM Courts & Tribunals Service scorecard
Complaint (AI summary)
Mr I complained HMCTS wrongly transferred his money claims to a defendant's local court, prejudicing him, and refused a court fee refund.
Outcome (AI summary)
The complaint was closed. The Ombudsman found no sign of error; court location information was available and the fee refusal was reasonable.

Full decision details

The Complaint

3. Mr I complains about HMCTS’s Money Claims Online service. He says when he submitted his claims in August and December 2022, he was asked which court he would like his case to be heard at. But the case was heard at a court local to the defendant and not at the court he requested. He complains HMCTS is wrong to say this was in line with Civil Procedure Rules, because this information is not available when submitting claims. He also says that despite HMCTS accepting the information is not available, it refused to refund his court fee of £275.

4. Mr I says that by the cases being transferred to a court local to the defendant, it clearly prejudiced his position and removed any impartiality or fairness and put him at a disadvantage. He explains for this reason he did not attend the hearing.

5. Mr I would like a refund of his court fee and an apology.

Background

6. On 6 August and 8 December 2022, Mr I made claims through the Money Claims Online service and paid the fee of £275. A decision notice was issued on 13 March 2023.

7. Mr I complained to HMCTS on 9 March 2023. HMCTS sent its final response on 5 June 2023.

Findings

9. Before we decide if we should do a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen. We have done this and have not seen any signs that something has gone wrong.

10. When Mr I complained to HMCTS about where the case was heard, it told him the decision was in line with the Civil Procedure Rules but it accepted there is no link to this on the claim form. HMCTS refused to refund his fee of £275.

11. In its review stage response from 27 April 2023, HMCTS says:

‘I’ve reviewed your case and I don’t find that staff made any errors when refusing your refund request. Please be advised that the fee to begin a claim is a processing fee meant to cover the administrative cost of administering your claim, which we are unable to refund once work has begun.

I don’t find that the Civil Procedure Rules caused you any disadvantage. I can see that once you informed us that you would have issues attending a hearing at the defendant’s court, the court arranged for a remote hearing which did not require you to be physically present in the building.’

12. HMCTS’s user guide under the heading ‘Proceeding with a defended case’ says, ‘if you are making a claim against an individual, the claim will be transferred to their local court. If you are making a claim against a company, the claim will be transferred to your local court, or to your solicitor’s local court’.

13. We have looked at the Money Claims Online website. The homepage says, ‘Before you begin using the Money Claim Online Service please make sure you familiarise yourself with the following information’. It then gives a link to the user guide quoted above. There is no link to the Civil Procedure Rules.

14. We recognise that the link to the Civil Procedure Rules is not available on the website. Although this information is available online, we understand Mr I feels that HMCTS’s reason for refusing to refund his court fee was wrong. The website advises applicants to familiarise themselves with the Money Claim Online user guide before proceeding. HMCTS told us applicants also have to confirm they have read this guidance before they continue with their claim. This guidance clearly explains that for claims against an individual, this will be listed at the defendant’s local court.

15. We recognise Mr I feels this puts him at a disadvantage. When Mr I raised his concerns, the judge agreed to make it a phone hearing so that Mr I did not need to travel to the court. But, Mr I declined to attend the hearing so his claim was dismissed, so there is no evidence to suggest the hearing was unfair.

16. HMCTS told us it knows its complaint responses could have been more helpful and referred to the user guide that is available instead of the Civil Procedure Rules. We agree with this as it would have been clearer for Mr I. But this does not change the fact that there is no evidence that HMCTS has done anything wrong because the information is available online and it was Mr I’s decision to not attend the hearing. We have seen nothing to suggest HMCTS’s decision not to refund the court fee was unreasonable.

Our Decision

1. We have carefully considered Mr I’s complaint about HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS). We have seen no sign that anything went wrong.

2. We understand Mr I feels he has been treated unfairly. We found the information about where the case would be heard is available on the Money Claims Online website. We do not find that HMCTS’s decision to not refund the court fee is unreasonable, or that the information about where cases are heard was unavailable.

Other Decisions About HM Courts and Tribunals Service

P-005107 · 25 Mar 2026
Mr X complains that HMCTS did not respond to an email he sent until eight months later, in which he …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-005072 · 23 Mar 2026
Mr B complains HMCTS delayed in sending out two court orders relating to an application for an Interim Possession Order …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-005060 · 19 Mar 2026
Mr F complains HMCTS incorrectly entered a judgement against him, failed to provide all evidence to the Judges, failed to …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004910 · 25 Feb 2026
Mr A brings his complaint about HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS), Mr A says that delays in his court …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004882 · 23 Feb 2026
Mr A complains about HMCTS' delay processing his probate application, its delayed communication, and that it did not respond to …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
View all decisions for this organisation →