![[2024] UKUT 159 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Documentary evidence before the Upper Tribunal
Documentary evidence before the Upper Tribunal
In addition to the decision letter, evidence in the bundle of 193 pages included:
DJB’s application to the relevant fostering agency to become a foster carer (March 2019) and reference letters in support
meeting notes about C’s placement with DJB, 18 January 2022
the fostering agency’s “statement of expectations” signed by DJB and supervising social worker, dated 18 January 2022
the fostering agency’s supervising social worker’s review report following allegations made against DJB, dated 6 February 2022
letter from DJB in response, dated 1 March 2022
DJB’s representations to DBS
four character references for DJB, one from someone whom DJB had taken care of whilst they were in foster care, and three from former colleagues/friends
a letter from DJB’s mother, who lived next door to her
messages between C and DJB
messages between B and DJB
DJB’s letter of appeal
DBS’s “Barring decision summary” document.
- 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