Page 108 - Solving Housing Disputes

and promote early resolution of disputes at proportionate cost. We recommend
the HCRS incorporate accredited, specialist ADR providers. The HCRS
pathways to disrepair, social landlord possession claims and other processes
which encourage ADR at the pre-action stage ought to feature prominent
signposts, nudges or “drop-off” points to ADR providers, including early
neutral evaluation, as part of any digital claim form.
Digital assistance

4.21 It is important that the HCRS exist in parallel with paper-based processes 308 for
309
those who are digitally excluded. Housing disputes can feature vulnerable
tenants and forcing people online, as has been done with Universal Credit, risks
further marginalising people struggling for legal help and assistance, also risking
the creation of a “digital underclass” unfairly excluded from dispute
310
resolution. Paper based processes in pre-existing schemes should be
maintained, but various forms of assistance should be offered for those who are
digitally excluded but nevertheless want the benefit of the signposting, assistance
and triage available through the portal.

4.22 For example, the TPT operates a digital interface for appeals against traffic
penalty notices and provides administrative assistance to those who lack digital
capability. Administrative staff answer telephone inquiries and act as “proxy
311
users” for appellants, complete paper-based appeal forms for users, which they
post out to them for signature with a reply-paid envelope addressed to the TPT.
For those unable to get representation, or unsure as to where their dispute ought

308 For instance, HMCTS has undertaken to maintain paper-based channels to access courts and tribunals
through the Reform Programme for those who are unable to get online, see Inside HMCTS blog, ‘Helping
people access our services online’ (12 October 2017), available online at https://insidehmcts.blog.gov.u
k/2017/10/12/helping-people-access-our-services-online/

309 JUSTICE’s 2018 Working Party, Preventing Digital Exclusion from Online Justice, noted that a
significant proportion of the population remains “digitally excluded”, though the precise extent of digital
exclusion is unclear, see JUSTICE note 43 above para 1.17 and see also Lloyds Bank note 253 above.

310 A 2016 academic study of internet non-use in the UK and Sweden suggested that digital exclusion
can become concentrated over time and that “non-user populations have become more concentrated in
vulnerable groups”, i.e. those who are “older, less educated, more likely to be unemployed, disabled and
socially isolated”, E. J. Helsper and B.C. Reisdorf, ‘The emergence of a “digital underclass” in Great
Britain and Sweden: changing reasons for digital exclusion’, (New Media and Society, 2016).

311 https://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/want-to-appeal/ See also JUSTICE note 43 above para 1.24

102