Skip to content

All content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0, except where otherwise stated.

To view this licence, visit:
https://nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3

or write to:
Information Policy Team,
The National Archives,
Kew,
London TW9 4DU

or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.

This publication is available at:
https://pecs-contract-guide.service.justice.gov.uk.

© Crown copyright

Court room operations

Advocates (Back to top)

Advocate/intermediaries may be arranged and invited to attend the criminal proceedings for young people and those that may have specific communication needs.

Their role is not to represent individuals during court proceedings but to provide impartial information that may help them understand what is happening by re-phrasing any questions that they may have trouble understanding or advise individuals how best to phrase questions which may help them understand/answer.

Advocates will also advise when they think individuals may need a break, based upon their individual needs.

Advocates will be admitted to court custody suites as professional visitors and all normal security requirements will apply (including when accompanying the child in a dock).

Calling a prisoner to court (Back to top)

The PECS supplier shall escort prisoners from the custody area to the courtroom as and when required with all possible speed, ensuring that the supplier causes no delays to the proceedings of the court.

Where an impact occurs, the impact must be challenged through the Court Exception Reporting Process. Impact normally occurs through two key issues:

  • Courtroom delay due to supplier actions resulting in a prisoner who is the responsibility of the supplier not being available in the courtroom at the required time.
  • Unavailability of supplier personnel for a courtroom when contracted to do so, resulting in a delay to court proceedings. 

Lost court time – court exception reports (Back to top)

Lost court time is where the court can no longer sit as there are no other suitable cases to be heard in the courtroom at the planned time for the case to commence.

Courts should endeavour to ensure all courtrooms are utilised in the event of a non-production of a prisoner by a PECS supplier.

This may be an easier process within the magistrates court than the crown courts due to the nature of the cases and listing patterns.

Service failures will be dealt with through Contract Delivery Indicators within the overall performance management framework for the contracts. As currently happens, to assist with this process courts are required to report in increments of 15 minutes where a supplier disrupts the courtroom by non-production of prisoners which results in a delay to work.

CERs submitted for courtroom delay due to no prisoner available or no dock officer:

  • CDI 14 Unavailability of supplier personnel for a courtroom when contracted to do so, resulting in a delay to court proceedings.
  • CDI 15 Courtroom delay due to supplier actions resulting in a prisoner who is the responsibility of the supplier not being available in the courtroom at the required courtroom appearance time and delay to court proceedings.
  • CDI 3.1 Courtroom delay due to supplier actions resulting in a child or young person who is the responsibility of the supplier not being available in the courtroom at the required courtroom appearance time and delay to court proceedings.

PECS relies on data provided by courts to manage suppliers and apply contractual remedies. PECS will share feedback on how this has happened with HMCTS colleagues.

If a failure occurs, courts should report the matter to PECS using the reporting form and in line with the associated guidance found on the HMCTS intranet.

Our assurance process allows the Authority to apply a proportionate and consistent approach to reviewing CERs and challenging supplier responses when there are conflicting assessments.

This assurance process is critical to the overall PECS supplier service delivery and Criminal Justice Service (CJS) performance.

This work is critical to managing supplier performance and driving service delivery across the CJS and influencing stakeholder behaviour to improve system outcomes.

Escalation process has been put in place for when a supplier does not agree with the authority’s challenge.

Timeframes for in month failures:

  • HMCTS to report delays in month within approximately 72 hours
  • CERs shall be sent to suppliers approximately 5 working days from date of reported failure in month
  • Self-reporting ensures supplier performance teams are aware of delays where a CER is not reported immediately/not reported at all by HMCTS
  • HMCTS have uploaded the latest version of the CER form to their intranet site so that courts have easy access to it

Court exception reporting (CER) process (Back to top)

  • HMCTS must submit the CERs within 72 hours to PECS Performance Team.
  • PECS Performance Team sends the CER to the supplier who reviews CERs and responds. (Only if it is recorded that they are or maybe culpable of the failure, is this escalated to the PECS supplier)
  • PECS Performance Team reviews supplier response to ensure is in line with the reasons stipulated in contract as being within or outside supplier’s control.
  • The supplier’s non acceptance of a CER where contract dictates it is outside of their control would be valid and not challenged (i.e. prison at fault).
  • If supplier does not accept a CER but reason given is deemed as in their control this is then referred to a Contract Delivery Manager (CDM) for them to challenge the supplier.
  • The CDM will investigate details of the journey, times of events (e.g. arrival and departure times at the prison/police station to collect the prisoner). Raise with HMCTS for further clarification and possibly police and HMPPS if necessary.
  • Once complete the CDM can then accept the supplier’s non acceptance or mount a challenge to the supplier.
  • A monthly CER review meeting is conducted by the Performance Team CER lead where CER challenges progress is discussed.
  • If the supplier does not accept a CDM CER challenge the supplier is asked to raise mitigation at the Contract Management Board (CMB).
  • The final decision is made at the CMB.

Children (Back to top)

To support a child friendly approach, PECS suppliers may be expected to facilitate a child’s hearing in the well of the court, rather than the dock.

This provides the opportunity for greater support from the child’s family (or other appropriate adults) and more relaxed proceedings.

It is recognised that finding the right balance between appropriate support and maintaining security cannot be absolutely defined, it is therefore essential that there is timely engagement with both HMCTS and the Judiciary, to risk assess and agree a plan to safely manage these requirements on a case-by-case basis.

By adopting this approach, it ensures the needs of the child is central to the decision making process.

Therefore, when a Judicial request is received to hear a child’s case in the well of the court, the following actions will be completed:

  • Every request will be reviewed by the PECS supplier on a case-by-case basis prior to the hearing.
  • PECS suppliers shall produce a risk assessment based on the requirements defined by the courtroom and practice guidance.
  • The risk assessment, identification of any supporting security arrangements and concerns must be collaboratively explored between all parties to conclude and agree the outcomes.
  • It is not an option for family members to sit in the dock with the child where risk assessments conclude that the child cannot be supervised in the well of the court.
  • Current arrangements defined through enhanced care remain in place to enable this to be delivered.

Contracted docks (Back to top)

Suppliers have a responsibility to staff all contracted docks in line with the agreed court schedule (31).

Any requests to increase or decrease contracted docks should firstly be discussed with PECS regional CDM and will need to be submitted through an official change request.

When all key areas have submitted summaries of the change, the form will need to be sent to hmctscontractedservices@justice.gov.uk for processing.

Where there is demand for additional docks the PECS suppliers can support these requests from the flexibility contained within the PECS contract around the delivery of court services.

However, should this demand be sustained or substantial then the Authority will be pragmatic and flexible.

To meet this need, we are aware that HMCTS may request the provision of additional court capacity.

HMCTS must approach the local PECS CDM to manage the change process.

Digital warrants (Back to top)

The digital warrant SLA sets minimum requirements and obligations for the digital transfer of adult warrants.

The warrant, any supplement to the warrant and bail orders are to be sent electronically within one hour of the conclusion of the hearing.

Where supporting documents cannot be sent in this time, they can be shared by the end of the working day.

Documents are to be sent to the calendar HMP establishment for court appearances in person.

Where defendants are produced virtually via prison to court video link (PCVL) from HMP, documents are to be sent to the calendar prison. Where they are located in police custody suites, documents should be sent to the police location they are being held at.

All emails to prisons, the PECS supplier or police must be sent by secure email from a court’s central mailbox.

EA/DDA compliant courts (Back to top)

There are a number of Equality Act (EA), or Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) compliant courts designated to support access to justice for disabled defendants across England and Wales.

Any prisoner (or off-bail defendant) who is disabled should have their case transferred to a compliant court, where appropriate facilities are in place to support their needs.

These facilities may include lifts, ramps and wheelchair access to custody suites and docks.

HMCTS are responsible for coordinating these arrangements, however, should you require further information please contact your Regional Contract Delivery Manager.

It should be noted that PECS supplier staff are not responsible for lifting or carrying prisoners in the absence of correct EA/DDA facilities.

Escalation process (Back to top)

All enquires, issues or concerns are to be directed to the supplier in the first instance. Where a matter cannot be resolved escalation can be made to the HMPPS PECS team.

Please raise any operational concerns that suppliers are unable to resolve through the local CDM for your location.

For urgent matters PECS CDMs operate 24 hour on-call support as communicated weekly through the HMPPS Gold Rota.

How are prisons and escort suppliers notified of required moves? (Back to top)

The aligned prison to the court shall be advised by the court (HMCTS) listings team of the prisoners to be physically produced to court for their hearing.

The prison Offender Management Unit (OMU) department receiving the ‘final list’ shall ensure that where a prisoner is not located in the aligned prison that they share the production requirement with the prison OMU department where the prisoner is located.

The prison OMU(s) shall book a movement request in BaSM (Book a Secure Move platform).

The discharging prison also ensures that the correct production request is facilitated, such as in person or video link.

Once the movement has been requested in OMU automatic journey requests are sent to the PECS suppliers through BaSM, PECS supplier then accept the move requests and conduct journey/route planning during the night prior to the movement date.

It is imperative that the ‘final list’ sent to the aligned prison is preferably done so by 15:30 hours each day to ensure that movements can be made on the BaSM system and the ‘final list’ sent to non-aligned prisons as required prior to the close of business day.

Where ‘final lists’ have subsequent iterations or are sent after the close of business hours this risks a prisoner being failed to be produced to court.

It is understandable that late changes are unavoidable due to unforeseen circumstances, in such circumstances these should be communicated directly with the aligned prison by direct phone or email communications, this is to enable any changes to be made by the prison.

Late sitting courts (Back to top)

Courts may sit later than expected, at the weekend or on a bank holiday or otherwise than as shown in the Indicative Court Data Sheets and the supplier shall continue to provide the services at all such times.

When the supplier has been advised by a court of a later or weekend or bank holiday sitting time, the supplier shall liaise with the prison and the court to ensure that the prisoner can be returned to the required designated location despite the late or weekend or bank holiday sitting.

National cross local justice protocol (Back to top)

Read further guidance on the national cross justice protocol. 

Overnight/late notification police productions (Back to top)

Defendants appearing at court from police stations are categorised and moved by PECS suppliers under 2 key contractual parameters: overnight notifications and late notifications.

Overnight notifications

Where defendants are booked onto BaSM (PTR) by the police after the achievable cut off time for the last court hearing of the day and prior to 04:00 hours the following morning.

For example, a booking is made at 15:00 hours with the schedule 31 courtroom finish time of 17:00 hours, PECS suppliers have 3 hours plus the journey time to court, as such will not achieve the final courtroom hearing time.

This also includes instances where HMCTS/the court are unable to accept/hear the case on the day in question.

Overnight defendants are to be collected on the PECS suppliers “initial” collection’s as soon as possible after 07:00 hours.

Late notifications

Where defendants are booked onto BaSM (PTR) by the police after 04:01 hours and before the final court hearing time where the collection and journey to court is achievable and HMCTS have accepted to hear the case.

For bookings between 04:01 and 07:59 hours the PECS suppliers should collect these defendants by 10:59 hours, the journey from the police station to court must be added to this time to provide an accurate estimated time of arrival.

All late notifications after 08:00 and before the end of the court hearing day, and where HMCTS have confirmed they can hear, are to be collected by the PECS suppliers within 3 hours of the booking. The journey time from the police station to the court must be added to the 3-hour collection time for an accurate ETA.

Court cell capacity and HMCTS unable to hear

There are instances where the volume of prisoners arriving at the court exceed the court custody suite cell capacity, in these circumstances where cell sharing risk assessments (CSRA) have been exhausted some defendants will be held back at the police station until additional capacity has been created.

There may also be occasions where HMCTS court capacity causes HMCTS to not accept defendants, as such they will also be held back at police stations.

Prioritisation of cases (Back to top)

Prioritisation of women

All criminal justice stakeholders and the Judiciary will be aware that women are a vulnerable cohort.

The dispersed nature of the women’s prison estate exaggerates these vulnerabilities and therefore prioritisation of women appearing in courts is urged where appropriate.

The responsible officer of the court shall be advised within 30 minutes of arriving at court if a prisoner is with a baby to encourage prioritisation of case listing.

The following points outline the operational and geographical pressures that can impact women adversely:

  • There are only 12 prisons in the women’s estate, seven of which have a ‘reception’ function, serving the courts. There are no women’s prisons in Wales.
  • PECS suppliers are required to commence a woman’s transfer to prison from court within two hours of her appearance concluding. The impact on supplier resources created by wider criminal justice issues, such as court capacity, prison capacity, and Operation Safeguard, can compound delays in turnaround times.
  • The small number of women’s prisons and their dispersed geography mean that each serves a larger number of courts and police stations than their male counterparts.
  • The resources available to transfer smaller numbers of women from many locations can be impacted by wider court redirections for both men and women, linked to prison capacity.
  • Prison capacity issues cause delays where women are redirected from court to an alternative prison, owing to lack of space in the aligned prison.
  • Women are much more likely than men to self-harm while in the custody of PECS suppliers. The distance from home and separation from children/family are key aggravating factors.
  • Long journeys from court to prison, with little opportunity for a break, which are uncomfortable for anyone, disproportionately affect women who are menstruating, pregnant, have recently given birth or have any other medical issues that may require more frequent access to a bathroom. This represents a significant equalities issue.
  • The average journey time for a woman transferring from court to prison is greater than a man’s.
  • Women arriving late in prison have reduced access to some medical provision and cannot fully engage in first night induction processes.

Prioritisation of children

Again, all stakeholders are aware that children are vulnerable within the criminal justice system, and although they are well supported by the PECS contract by the provision of enhanced care arrangements, their time in court custody should be minimised where possible.

PECS have been made aware of numerous regular issues across England and Wales, where children are bailed to local authority (LA) care quite late in the day. 

There have been examples where local authorities have been unable to secure suitable accommodation in a timely manner, resulting in the child remaining in secure custody for unnecessarily extended periods of time, until they can be handed over to LA staff.

Earlier court outcomes would provide LAs with sufficient time to arrange accommodation during the core day, rather than relying on emergency out of hours provision, which often have other critical priorities in the community.

The increased use of video links to conduct eligible and appropriate court hearings is a strategic priority for HMCTS, HMPPS and the police.

Each time a video link to the prison is used there is a direct saving to the CJS through reduced spending on PECS.

Through the effective and efficient use of video links, HMCTS can provide a better service to court users, assist with the throughput of the business in the courts and at the same time deliver savings and reduce risk through fewer prisoner movements.

Legislation allows, where appropriate, for the use of prison to court video links in all cases except trials (including matters involving young people and sentencing).

Courts should investigate current local practices and work closely with their local prisons to ensure maximum utilisation of the video link equipment.

Issues raised at the national level are expected to be urgent in nature and will be dealt with as such.

However, all urgent and non-urgent issues will be addressed at regular contract review meetings which are attended by HMCTS, HMPPS and the relevant suppliers.

HMCTS Contracted Services will feed back the results of such resolutions to the Cluster Manager.

Warrant of further detention (Back to top)

Read further guidance for the Warrant of Further Detention procedures.