![[2024] UKUT 159 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
B’s overnight stays at DJB’s home and arrangements for parking his vehicles
B’s overnight stays at DJB’s home and arrangements for parking his vehicles
DJB said that the only times B stayed overnight were the two nights in September, (when B had just left his other partner); and the time he slept on the sofa on 10 January 2022; DJB said that B stayed safely away from C. DJB said that B’s van was parked overnight outside her house because B couldn’t leave it at his work place, as it was dangerous; and his car was parked there during the day (as he drove his car to pick up the van).
Whilst the documentary evidence (including from DJB, such as her 1 March 2022 response) presents her relationship with B as romantic in nature, DJB’s representation to the Upper Tribunal of 17 March 2024 sought to characterise it as more a “friendship”, emphasising the difficulty of progressing a romantic relationship in circumstances where DJB was a foster carer for C.
Summary of DBS’s case
DBS adduced no new evidence at the hearing and submitted, in high-level summary, that there was no material mistake of fact or law in the decision.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal. The decision of the Respondent made on 23 March 2023 (reference DBS6191 00986829326 ) to include DJB in the children’s and adults’ barred l
- The decision
- Jurisdiction of the Upper Tribunal
- Grant of permission to appeal
- Documentary evidence before the Upper Tribunal
- The Upper Tribunal hearing
- The background facts
- Summary of DJB’s main arguments and evidence on contested matters
- Knowledge of B’s cautions for sexual offences and efforts to get B “checked”
- B’s overnight stays at DJB’s home and arrangements for parking his vehicles
- Discussion: did DBS make mistakes of fact or law in the decision?
- Core finding 2 (the DJB did not disclose B’s two convictions for sexual offences)
- Core finding 3 (the DJB was deceptive re: B by breaching statement of expectations re: spending the night at DJB’s home, being present when C there, length of relationship, and how long DJB knew about
- Core finding 1 (the DJB did not sufficiently safeguard C by adhering to expectations re: B, which caused end of placement and distress to C)
- DBS’s other factual findings
- Mistake on a point of law?
- Conclusions