Disabled people
If this is your first visit, check out the community guide. You will have to Join us or Sign in before you can post.

Recording Assessment intervew & Admission and Disclosure

RicardoEnricoRicardoEnrico Member Posts: 1 Listener
edited May 2019 in Disabled people
Hi to everyone here!

I just joined as a legal professional with a disability. I joined as soon as I saw the post about the wrongs and rights of making recordings of assessment interviews. My experience here comes from court work.

So let me say this:

It's not unlawful to record an Assessment interview covertly. Here are a few of things to take into consideration.

(1) A covert recording may not be admitted as evidence in a court, or tribunal, but in certain circumstances, it may be accepted. Bear in mind that you must do no editing to it whatsoever; not even edit out an inconvenient noise. You would be advised to extract the recording to your computer, not a computer that does not properly show file dates and times of first and last touch; a PC is best. Zip the file up and store copies in 2 or more locations not together; If you are represented, send one copy to your legal representative and ask him to draft a simple swearing about what it is, as a true recording of fact.

(2) No permission needs to be sought to use a recording made in a public place. A recording created this way may be used as evidence if the file is available for examination, as in (1) above;

(3) An objection to the recording, upon asking permission, and whilst there is no other form of recording, of which you would be entitled to ask for a copy, or no reasonable excuse or explanation, may cause an adverse inference to be drawn; of course your recording equipment should record the refusal, because in any case you are likely to want the recording, even if you cannot, for the purposes of evidence disclose it, (or the rest of it) you may at least show it was refused. Many times upon hearing the refusal of permission to record, judges will not take kindly to such reasonable request, if that's what it was, being denied, and knowing there is, in fact, a full recording that you explain you know you cannot use, will often use their powers to hear the whole thing, thus admitting it into the proceedings, especially if you are a litigant in person. I refer to 'judges' but that applies equally to the chair of a tribunal; any person who will make a finding of fact;

(4) Even if you cannot use the recording in a proceeding, the mere fact of having it empowers you quite considerably. You have time to reflect upon what is being said and the way it is being said. Sometimes I actually say to clients, don't alert the other party or we won't get a true picture what they're up to (people up to no good are unlikely to agree to be recorded). Of course, what you know cannot be deducted and often times that may well be enough for your purpose.

(5) A digital recording is indifferent as to the quality, better in fact than tape and its easy to look at the sound wave to deduce any tampering, but you don't want to go there. A judge may well take a digital recording and rule that it is likely to be a true record of the interview. Judges are extremely creative these days; they come from a time of many injustices, and you have to remember that people invariably enter the legal profession to see justice done. The fact that some go on to earn an extraordinary income is not a reflection of the profession as a whole. Barristers often earn less than solicitors, and legal experts often have what we call a drought when there is no work coming in,

Hope this has been helpful. Now record to your heart's content.


Sign in or join us to comment.