This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/dec/18/gove-sorry-ministry-of-justice-divorce-software-error

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Gove says sorry for MoJ divorce settlement software error Michael Gove says sorry for MoJ divorce settlement software error
(about 1 hour later)
Michael Gove, the justice secretary, has said it is “deeply regrettable” that thousands of couples who have settled their divorces in the past 20 months might have to reopen negotiations due to a software error revealed by the Guardian. It is “deeply regrettable” that thousands of couples who settled their divorces in the past 20 months might have to reopen negotiations due to a software error revealed by the Guardian, Michael Gove has said.
Gove apologised to all those hit by faults with “Form E” on the Ministry of Justice website, which has been miscalculating assets since April 2014, potentially inflating the financial worth of a wife or husband. The justice secretary apologised to all those hit by faults with “Form E” on his ministry’s website, which has been miscalculating assets since April 2014, potentially inflating the financial worth of a spouse.
The error was spotted earlier this month by a family law specialist, Nicola Matheson-Durrant of the Family Law Clinic in Ascot, Berkshire. The MoJ only publicly admitted the problem on Thursday and has published an email address – formE@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk – asking anyone who believes they have been affected to contact the department. Related: Revealed: divorce software error hits thousands of settlements
The error was spotted earlier this month by a family law specialist, Nicola Matheson-Durrant of the Family Law Clinic in Ascot, Berkshire. The Ministry of Justice only publicly admitted to the problem on Thursday and has published an email address – formE@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk – asking anyone who believes they have been affected to contact the department.
Speaking on the World at One on BBC Radio 4 on Friday, Gove said: “It is deeply regrettable that a form was online since April 2014, which has meant … up to 17,000 people may have had the allocation of resources, at what is an inevitably stressful time in their life, miscalculated.”Speaking on the World at One on BBC Radio 4 on Friday, Gove said: “It is deeply regrettable that a form was online since April 2014, which has meant … up to 17,000 people may have had the allocation of resources, at what is an inevitably stressful time in their life, miscalculated.”
Gove offered apologies to all those affected during the interview. Gove offered his apologies to all those affected.
One particular paragraph, numbered 2.20, which is supposed to produce totals, fails to reflect the minus figure of final liabilities entered earlier on, producing a simple mathematical error. If a party had significant debts or liabilities, they were not recognised or recorded on the electronic form, potentially inflating their true worth. Distorted net figures of applicants’ assets were therefore being produced.One particular paragraph, numbered 2.20, which is supposed to produce totals, fails to reflect the minus figure of final liabilities entered earlier on, producing a simple mathematical error. If a party had significant debts or liabilities, they were not recognised or recorded on the electronic form, potentially inflating their true worth. Distorted net figures of applicants’ assets were therefore being produced.
Not all divorcing or separating couples use the online form – some prefer pen and paper calculations – but the impact of the errors could be widespread.Not all divorcing or separating couples use the online form – some prefer pen and paper calculations – but the impact of the errors could be widespread.
The discovery comes at a time when the senior judiciary and the justice secretary are encouraging the development of online justice as a means of improving courtroom efficiency and making further economies.The discovery comes at a time when the senior judiciary and the justice secretary are encouraging the development of online justice as a means of improving courtroom efficiency and making further economies.
Earlier this year an official report backed by the master of the rolls, Lord Dyson, recommended that the UK civil justice system undergo a radical overhaul for the digital age, with the creation of an online court to expand access to justice and resolve claims of up to £25,000.Earlier this year an official report backed by the master of the rolls, Lord Dyson, recommended that the UK civil justice system undergo a radical overhaul for the digital age, with the creation of an online court to expand access to justice and resolve claims of up to £25,000.
Those most likely to have been affected by the divorce form’s miscalculations are litigants who could not afford to employ a lawyer and who had more modest assets, where the disparity may have been less immediately noticeable.
A number of recent divorcees who experienced difficulties with the form contacted the Guardian. One man said he had emailed family justice officials in August 2014 to point out the error but the MoJ response had not acknowledged that there was a fault. He eventually printed out the form and entered correct figures by hand.
Another man, who wished to remain anonymous, said he noticed the calculations left out debts or liabilities. He did not dispute it because, although a “significant sum”, it was relatively small compared to other disputed assets. He did not see the “workings” so assumed the solicitor had made a mistake in a manual calculation.
A third man, experienced in using spreadsheets, said he managed to overwrite the electronic website, adding a note in red letters pointing out the error and inserting corrected figures. “I realised it was throwing up false figures,” he said.
Jo Edwards, a solicitor who is chair of the family law organisation Resolution, called for additional court costs incurred by divorced couples to be paid by the government.
“Some of the thousands of people potentially affected by the unfortunate Form E error, many of them self-represented litigants, may need to return to the courtroom to have their financial settlements renegotiated,” she said.
“In these cases, I would expect any further court fees – £50 if agreement is reached and a consent order lodged with the court, £255 if there is no agreement and court proceedings need to be issued – to be waived, as the additional court costs will be incurred through no fault of the applicant’s own.
“However, it seems highly unlikely that the government will find itself liable for lawyer’s fees in these reopened cases – such a sum would be unquantifiable and place a huge strain on the public purse.”
Another family law expert, Carmel Brown, from the firm Thomas Eggar, said: “This error of the MoJ’s software is very basic but potentially catastrophic. In particular, it could seriously affect those people with large liabilities, including credit card debts, bank loans and tax liabilities, as the miscalculation would produce a wrong and misleading picture of their wealth.”