Hi everyone
I’ve consulted with our solicitors
and I can confirm that copies of scanned documents are used in housing benefit
and fraud prosecutions. In many cases, the original paper copy has been
destroyed but to date our solicitors have had no problems with the Magistrates’
Court over the admissibility of the scanned electronic copy.
In County Court original paper copies are
still used.
Regards
Sarah
From:
The UK Records Management mailing list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of
Sent: 01 July 2008 09:39
To:
[log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Admission of scanned
content
Dear All,
As
we have a solicitor who has all e-mails printed off for them [sic] and they
responds via Dictaphone I agree with Paul that it may be the reticence of
solicitors to accept new working practice.
On
the other hand we have a legal team who are leading and piloting a scanning
EDRMS case file project so they do not have to carry loads of suitcases to and
from court; which will accept the electronic records.
I
cannot remember who said it but it has been said that it is at the Judge's
discretion whether or not to accept an electronic records but courts have been
advised that they are acceptable.
Regards
David
|
Paul Dodgson
<[log in to unmask]> 25/06/2008 15:54
|
|
Hi
all,
Many parts of our organisation are scanning closed case files (without my
guidance) and intend to rely upon that scanned content as evidence in court.
If I advised them to stop, they would run out of storage space in weeks.
Another
business area has, at last, sought guidance. I was delighted!
I went to BIP0008 and 0009 and then marched on through the workbook only
to be held by our lawyers at section 2.4 where legal issues are dealt with and
section 2.4.12 where legal consultation is required.
We now have a situation where our lawyers are advising that to scan content in
presents too great a risk in terms of evidential weight.
Our lawyers are saying (not surprisingly) that the original must be held.
However, much of what is regarded as an original these days actually pre-exists
the paper equivalent as an electronic record. The excellent BIP 0008
guidance and BIP 0009 workbook helps. However, the argument remains - if
the courts want to see the "original" then that is (where information
is created electronically) the electronic representation (I am careful not to
call it the electronic copy - easy mistake to make).
Audit trails do not, generally, exist
for paper records often the evidence as to admissibility comes
from a stamp or a signature - undoubtedly secure signs of admissibility!!(not).
Electronic
records at least hold some value in terms of evidential weight which is a
little more difficult to alter. With EDRMS the arguments as to evidential
weight is somewhat stronger.
Even
if the paper copy was the original, Marc Fresko's comment about best evidence
should still stand.
In
conclusion, it is my view that it is the lawyers who are reticent to move
forward, the argument to the Judge about admissibility is merely one which the
lawyer wants to avoid.
So
why email? I am trying to gauge the extent of problem this is posing to
records managers, in all business sectors, and where lawyers have accepted the
principle of scan and destroy - please do share this with me.
regards
Paul
Dodgson
___________________________________________________________________________
Support
your local council workers in this year’s National Council Worker of the
Year Awards by clicking:
Vote for Jane Dabrowska - http://www.localgovernmentchannel.com/awards/c/innovation/v/jane_dabrowska/y/2008/
Vote for Lee Fradsham - http://www.localgovernmentchannel.com/awards/c/bravery/v/lee_fradsham/y/2008/
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
This
e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage, disclosure, copying or any
other action taken in respect of this e-mail is prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
using the reply function and then permanently delete what you have received.
Incoming
and outgoing e-mail messages are routinely monitored for compliance with
Leicestershire County Council's policy on the use of electronic communications.
The contents of e-mails may have to be disclosed to a request under the Data
Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
The
views expressed by the author may not necessarily reflect the views or policies
of the Leicestershire County Council.
Attachments
to e-mail messages may contain viruses that may damage your system. Whilst
Leicestershire County Council has taken every reasonable precaution to minimise
this risk, we cannot accept any liability for any damage which you sustain as a
result of these factors. You are advised to carry out your own virus checks
before opening any attachment.
**********************************************************************
Opinions advice, conclusions and other information in this
message that do not relate to the official business of
Flintshire County Council shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it or on its behalf, and consequently
Flintshire County Council shall bear no responsibility
whatsoever in respect thereof.
Deellir na fydd unrhyw safbwyntiau, na chynghorion, na
chasgliadau nac unrhyw wybodaeth arall yn y neges hon,
nad ydynt yn berthnasol i waith swyddogol
Cyngor Sir y Fflint, yn cael eu cynnig na'u cadarnhau ganddo
nac ar ei ran, ac felly ni fydd Cyngor Sir y Fflint yn derbyn
unrhyw gyfrifoldeb am y rhannau hynny o'r neges.
**********************************************************************