To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.


View sample alert

Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Investment: Fraud
Wednesday 2nd July 2025

Asked by: Sarah Bool (Conservative - South Northamptonshire)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 13 June 2025 to Question 57939 on Investment: Fraud, what steps HMRC is taking to improve (a) communication (b) access to specialist caseworkers, (c) financial hardship assessments and (d) other support to individuals facing tax demands linked to fraudulent investment schemes.

Answered by James Murray - Chief Secretary to the Treasury

I refer the honorable Member to the response to UIN 57939.

Where an individual disagrees with HMRC’s decision on their tax liability, they can appeal by requesting HMRC reviews the decision, use an Alternative Dispute Resolution process in appropriate cases, or by making an appeal to the independent tax tribunal.

HMRC appreciates and recognises dealing with tax, financial hardship, or debt can lead to pressure on people. All HMRC advisers are given training and guidance on how to identify customers who need extra help and how to provide tailored support themselves or refer the customer to HMRC’s specialist extra support provision.

In January HMRC published its approach to dealing with agents, which has established the Standard for Agents, and is currently consulting on enhanced powers to tackle non-compliance facilitated by tax agents. It will publish guidance shortly, which will set out its approach to preventing and addressing intermediary harm and also support customers to identify signs of harmful intermediary behaviour, including fraud.

In April HMRC launched a new Compliance Interactive Guidance Tool on GOV.UK to help customers more easily find guidance on compliance checks and extra support available, particularly for unrepresented customers and those with extra support needs.


Written Question
Investment: Fraud
Wednesday 2nd July 2025

Asked by: Sarah Bool (Conservative - South Northamptonshire)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 13 June 2025 to Question 57939 on Investment: Fraud, what criteria HMRC uses to determine whether a tax liability arising from an investment scheme promoted through fraudulent means constitutes a genuine tax liability.

Answered by James Murray - Chief Secretary to the Treasury

I refer the honorable Member to the response to UIN 57939.

Where an individual disagrees with HMRC’s decision on their tax liability, they can appeal by requesting HMRC reviews the decision, use an Alternative Dispute Resolution process in appropriate cases, or by making an appeal to the independent tax tribunal.

HMRC appreciates and recognises dealing with tax, financial hardship, or debt can lead to pressure on people. All HMRC advisers are given training and guidance on how to identify customers who need extra help and how to provide tailored support themselves or refer the customer to HMRC’s specialist extra support provision.

In January HMRC published its approach to dealing with agents, which has established the Standard for Agents, and is currently consulting on enhanced powers to tackle non-compliance facilitated by tax agents. It will publish guidance shortly, which will set out its approach to preventing and addressing intermediary harm and also support customers to identify signs of harmful intermediary behaviour, including fraud.

In April HMRC launched a new Compliance Interactive Guidance Tool on GOV.UK to help customers more easily find guidance on compliance checks and extra support available, particularly for unrepresented customers and those with extra support needs.


Written Question
Investment: Fraud
Wednesday 2nd July 2025

Asked by: Sarah Bool (Conservative - South Northamptonshire)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 13 June 2025 to Question 57939 on Investment: Fraud, whether HMRC has a formal process for reviewing tax demands issued to individuals who have been identified as victims of financial fraud.

Answered by James Murray - Chief Secretary to the Treasury

I refer the honorable Member to the response to UIN 57939.

Where an individual disagrees with HMRC’s decision on their tax liability, they can appeal by requesting HMRC reviews the decision, use an Alternative Dispute Resolution process in appropriate cases, or by making an appeal to the independent tax tribunal.

HMRC appreciates and recognises dealing with tax, financial hardship, or debt can lead to pressure on people. All HMRC advisers are given training and guidance on how to identify customers who need extra help and how to provide tailored support themselves or refer the customer to HMRC’s specialist extra support provision.

In January HMRC published its approach to dealing with agents, which has established the Standard for Agents, and is currently consulting on enhanced powers to tackle non-compliance facilitated by tax agents. It will publish guidance shortly, which will set out its approach to preventing and addressing intermediary harm and also support customers to identify signs of harmful intermediary behaviour, including fraud.

In April HMRC launched a new Compliance Interactive Guidance Tool on GOV.UK to help customers more easily find guidance on compliance checks and extra support available, particularly for unrepresented customers and those with extra support needs.


Written Question
Gambling: Dispute Resolution
Wednesday 2nd July 2025

Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)

Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, whether the outcomes of disputes resolved via Alternative Dispute Resolution bodies in relation to gambling operators are reported to the Gambling Commission.

Answered by Stephanie Peacock - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)

The Gambling Commission must approve all Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) providers and has set specific additional standards for ADR in its standards and guidance. The Commission expects ADR providers to submit quarterly activity returns to the Gambling Commission, which contain the number of domestic disputes received, and the number and percentage of disputes upheld in favour of the gambling business and the number and percentage of disputes settled by the gambling business without an outcome being imposed. However, the Gambling Commission does not hold data on settlement amounts.


Written Question
Gambling: Dispute Resolution
Wednesday 2nd July 2025

Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)

Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what proportion of resolutions to gambling-related disputes via Alternative Dispute Resolution providers result in the complainant receiving a settlement for the full amount lost.

Answered by Stephanie Peacock - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)

The Gambling Commission must approve all Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) providers and has set specific additional standards for ADR in its standards and guidance. The Commission expects ADR providers to submit quarterly activity returns to the Gambling Commission, which contain the number of domestic disputes received, and the number and percentage of disputes upheld in favour of the gambling business and the number and percentage of disputes settled by the gambling business without an outcome being imposed. However, the Gambling Commission does not hold data on settlement amounts.


Written Question
First-tier Tribunal: Standards
Monday 9th June 2025

Asked by: Lisa Smart (Liberal Democrat - Hazel Grove)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps her Department is taking to reduce delays in the (a) processing and (b) hearing of cases at the First-Tier Tribunal.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

This Government inherited a broken justice system with record and rising court backlogs. We are determined to reverse these trends in this Parliament. HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) continues to invest in improving tribunal productivity by:

  • Increasing capacity. The Lord Chancellor announced on 5 March 2025 a record investment of £2.5 billion across all court and tribunals, both civil and criminal, in 2025/26. This will allow HMCTS to increase the number of sitting days available to the tribunals to close to maximum capacity and continue a substantial judicial recruitment programme which is already underway. We have continued investment this year in the recruitment of up to 1,000 judges and tribunal members across all jurisdictions. This includes recruitment targeted at First-tier Tribunal chambers with the greatest business need.
  • Smarter case management. The Government is encouraging the greater use of technology to speed up the start to end process from receipt of appeal applications to their disposal. For example, in the Employment Tribunals, HMCTS has introduced a new digital case-management system, legal-officer triage, remote-hearing technology and a “virtual region” to hear appeal applications more efficiently. We are also investing in expanding our mediation offering to resolve cases before they reach the Tribunal, such as in the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal where we have expanded the remit of Judicial Alternative Dispute Resolution.

We expect these actions to have a positive effect on timeliness performance.


Written Question
Internet: Safety
Friday 6th June 2025

Asked by: Julian Smith (Conservative - Skipton and Ripon)

Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of requiring an independent alternative dispute resolution process for the resolution of disputes in relation to online safety between users and platforms.

Answered by Feryal Clark

The Online Safety Act 2023 requires platforms to put in place reporting and complaints processes to resolve disputes. In the first instance, service providers are best placed to respond to individual complaints on online safety. However, the Act 2023 requires Ofcom to review the efficacy of platforms’ complaint processes and publish a report within two years of the relevant duties taking effect. We expect this in early 2028.

Following this report, the Secretary of State has a power to require Category 1 services to put in place, or engage with, an ‘alternative dispute resolution’ process.


Written Question
Government Departments: Mediation
Thursday 5th June 2025

Asked by: Julian Smith (Conservative - Skipton and Ripon)

Question to the Attorney General:

To ask the Solicitor General, whether she has made an assessment of the potential merits of using mediation in disputes in which the Government is a party in a (a) private and (b) public law capacity.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The Government conducts litigation in accordance with the relevant court rules and considers the individual circumstances of a dispute before deciding on an appropriate course of action, which may include mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution.


Written Question
Telecommunications: Infrastructure
Wednesday 4th June 2025

Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the number of land access disputes between access seekers and providers in relation to electronic communications networks since the introduction of the Electronic Communications Code; and what action they are taking in relation to increased costs or delays associated with tribunal referrals.

Answered by Baroness Jones of Whitchurch

Government is aware of an increase in applications to the tribunal following the 2017 reforms to the Electronic Communications Code. While Government understands most applications do not proceed to a full hearing, Government is keen that agreements are reached on a consensual basis wherever possible.

The Product Security and Telecommunications Infrastructure Act 2022 introduced a requirement for operators to inform landowners of the availability of alternative dispute resolution and to consider using it before issuing legal proceedings. It is hoped that this will encourage more collaborative negotiations between operators and site providers, and reduce costs and litigation.


Written Question
Revenue and Customs: Mediation
Tuesday 3rd June 2025

Asked by: Julian Smith (Conservative - Skipton and Ripon)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what discussions she has had with HMRC on the effectiveness of using mediation in tax disputes.

Answered by James Murray - Chief Secretary to the Treasury

HMRC’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) service can help in cases where there is a dispute. An HMRC mediator will work with the customer, their agent and the HMRC caseworker to explore points that might have been misunderstood and try and reach agreement on a way forward.

If a case is accepted into HMRC’s ADR process, it will typically incur no cost to the customer, unless they choose to be represented by an agent, or hire a mediator of their own choice to co-mediate. A mediator will aim to conclude the process within 4 months.

In 2024-25, of the cases accepted into the ADR process, 88.7% of these were resolved. This illustrates the benefit of ADR in appropriate cases in resolving and clarifying points to ensure both parties come to an agreement and prevent unnecessary litigation.

A key component of successful ADR is the collaboration of both parties to the dispute working towards an agreed outcome within the parameters of ensuring the correct tax at the correct time.