Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To ask what happens if you can't afford to do jury service?

257 replies

AvocadosBeforeMortgages · 04/09/2018 09:43

Let me start off by saying that I always thought I'd like to do jury service one day.

Now I've discovered that not only do my employers not pay you when you're on jury service, the rates courts pay you for loss of earnings are paltry - the sum I'd get for the first 10 days would be less than half what I'd actually lose, and rates from day 11 are still less than my wages so I couldn't actually afford to do it www.gov.uk/jury-service/what-you-can-claim

Can you refuse to do jury service on the grounds that you can't afford the loss of earnings? I'm single and have rent to pay, for context.

OP posts:
HoppingPavlova · 04/09/2018 13:46
  • sry, meant to be that you believe all men are rapists.
Sarcelle · 04/09/2018 13:49

I have done JS 3 times, was actually summons 4 times in total. The third time was the one I got out of. I was moving that week. Last time I did it was 2 years ago. I hope I don’t get called again.

My DH would like to do it. Never bern summons. I would really like to know how they choose people.

My employer pays but there were a few self employed fellow jurors who said they were very out of pocket.

IamtheDevilsAvocado · 04/09/2018 13:49

It's important that EVERY citizen who can should serve... (save ICU patients/folk with severe LD, severe illness that would impact on jury service).

However, the state should reimburse the full cost. Otherwise people just find other reasons to get out of it.

We then have unrepresentative juries of the elderly /unemployed /students

Namechangeforthiscancershit · 04/09/2018 13:49

I think it should be compulsory for employers to give all their employees paid special leave. I'm actually shocked that it isn't already tbh

But some cases go on for a year. How many small businesses could afford to pay someone for a year and pay a replacement too. Maybe there should be some insurance for this or something? Maybe there is.

toomuchtooold · 04/09/2018 13:52

Do they still ask you what holidays you have booked? 20 years ago I got the letter and in the 6 months following I had 3 months planned to be at the other end of the UK, for work and I was going travelling for a month. They just let me off.

AuFinch · 04/09/2018 13:55

Unfortunately they dont go away. My OH tried to get out of it because he is self-employed, deferred it and was called up again, I cant remember how many times they asked, but he did do one lot of jury service and then was called up yet again - he wrote a letter to say he had already done it once and put it in nice words about it being a pain in the bum and how much of a loss it was, as the business IS him it cannot run without him, and they left him alone then.

Although its a loss its best to get it out of the way as they just keep deferring you and a few years later they ask again, and again. The only good excuse seems to be if you already done it and already lost out. Its unfair really.

PandaPolarBear · 04/09/2018 13:56

People saying the courts should reimburse the full cost... does that mean you think that higher earners should be paid more for jury service than low earners.

Should I, earning a little below the national average, have to sit on a jury next to someone who is being reimbursed perhaps £100-150 more per day than me for doing the exact same thing?

Redglitter · 04/09/2018 14:00

That’s only likely if they knew you’d received it. They don’t send them recorded delivery

No if you dont respond to the citation within I think it's 7 days then you can also be fined. Presumably they'll recontact you first in case the letter has genuinely gone astray. You can't just ignore it or everyone would do that.

pitapizzapie · 04/09/2018 14:01

Panda- yes. Bluntly, your time costs what you're selling it for, the person next to you is more in demand, and their time costs more. Supply and demand, capitalism, innit.

I think there should be an awareness campaign, and people can either:

  • ensure it's on their home insurance, or can buy a low cost insurance policy
  • make it law that employers give paid leave, and they can insure against that
or
  • full cost to each person is reimbursed by the court.

The last option is probably the easiest to administer, but then you get people saying 'it's not fair!'

Thesearmsofmine · 04/09/2018 14:02

HE is not the usual choice, so if you do it, surely you'll have thought about 'what if I can't do the care/educating'.

Yes as I have explained if there is an emergency and I am not able to look after my children then I have people who could step in, if I was unable to educate them in the longer term they would go to school but jury service is not an emergency and £64 a day for suitable childcare for 3 children is not going to cover it. Jury service is something that I can and would happily do when my children are teens or older.

HopeGarden · 04/09/2018 14:07

You request a deferral from the court, not just help yourself to one. And your service can only be deferred once.

So what happens if the court agrees to defer you for whatever reason, and then the next time they ask there’s a different valid reason why you want a deferral? Surely that must happen at least occasionally?

Spikeyball · 04/09/2018 14:11

In some cases the deferral would have to be for an indefinite time

DontCallMeCharlotte · 04/09/2018 14:12

£65 a day is equivalent to £23,725 - only if you're working 365 days a year. Assuming four weeks' holiday plus bank holidays, it's nearer £15k.

I'm in my 50s and I've never been called up. Possibly for work-related reasons although colleagues have been called so I'm not entirely sure.

HoppingPavlova · 04/09/2018 14:12

Should I, earning a little below the national average, have to sit on a jury next to someone who is being reimbursed perhaps £100-150 more per day than me for doing the exact same thing?

Yes, if they want people in jury’s. Why should people be out of pocket (as compared with usual earnings) in order to sit on a jury?

Every employer I have had with the exception of govnt employment has paid the usual monthly figure minus what you ‘earn’ from jury duty. I understand not every employer is obliged to do it but many do. So yes, you may well be sitting next to someone who is taking home a lot more than you that month than you for doing exactly the same thing. I had a colleague who sat on a jury for a case that went for around 7 months. 7 months of being paid a great salary for sitting on a jury. A bit of that was being holed up in a hotel room (not sure if this was just for final deliberations or for a longer stretch throughout). They have no kids and initially viewed it as a nice holiday from work. It was a really nasty murder trial and they ended up with PTSD.

evilharpy · 04/09/2018 14:28

My husband was called up once, except they sent the letter to an old address and we only found out months too late when the tenant of our old flat gave the landlord the letter to forward on. It was about two years after we had moved so the post forwarding service had run out and we had notified HMRC etc of the change of address immediately after moving. They had never chased up the lack of response as far as we know. My husband did get in touch and told them what had happened, was told don't worry about it, we might call you up again, but he hasn't heard anything since. This must have been about eight years ago.

I've never been called and hate the very thought of it. My employer pays full salary while you're on jury service but it's not the money, it's more the thought of being allocated to a really upsetting case.

I think it's horribly unfair that anyone should be out of pocket though, it's a shit system.

Hoppinggreen · 04/09/2018 14:51

red they don’t have the resources to chase all the letters they send
They chase people who respon and fine them for not turning up but it’s very different from them being able to prove a letter arrived, and no, they don’t send another letter later

DGRossetti · 04/09/2018 14:55

Is my memory that your ESA gets stopped if you are called for jury duty correct ?

DGRossetti · 04/09/2018 14:55

Sorry JSA ....

itsalldyingout · 04/09/2018 15:00

My DP's colleague was called, but was working 12 hour shifts.

Called for a Monday morning after a 12 hour night shift the night before. Did another 2 shifts between attending. Work refused time off as he technically wasn't at work.

He turned up but slept with his head on a desk for the three days that he had to work his regular night shifts. He was driving from work to home, showering and eating breakfast, then heading to JS 20 miles away.

As well as the hours spent working and at service he was driving 2 hours a day, which IMO was dangerous. He was lucky he didn't have an accident as he later told DP he caught himself nodding off at the wheel several times.

He was relieved when it was over without being called on a case as it meant he'd have to stay awake and concentrate which he doubted he could do.

He didn't think of asking for deferral.

LaurieFairyCake · 04/09/2018 15:08

Redglitter

They don’t chase. They send hundreds of letters and chase the ones that respond initially only.

They don’t contact you another way either (unless you’ve responded and given email/phone etc)

flirtygirl · 04/09/2018 15:25

I think I win thread bingo for all the reasons I wouldn't do jury service.

Single parent, living far from family and friends, no childcare locally, don't normally use childcare, am a full time carer to 1 disabled dc, home educate other dc, would lose income as start a wfh job in Jan 19 after having been a sahm and carer for 11 years.

So would I do jury service, even if all the above did not apply, no I would not and I say that as someone who has a law degree.

I don't trust the legal system, I have no faith in it and sorry, I don't have a civic duty.

As an aside more women jurors would not change the outcome of rape trials. The evidence allowed to be presented and the evidence collected or not is more important, but of even more importance is the attitude of the legal profession and police surrounding these cases and the language used.

The good girl, bad woman, attire, attitude to women drinking /clubbing/breathing, friend rape vs stranger rape, all these have far more impact on a successful prosecution for rape than the no of women sitting on a jury.

The same goes for dv and child abuse cases, laughingly low prosecutions and pathetic sentences.

SpringSnow · 04/09/2018 16:00

There's a lot of posters on here who seem to advocate following the rules no matter the personal cost. Fuck that. Why do so many mumsnetters bow down to authority?

ilovesooty · 04/09/2018 16:04

I wonder how many people who simply don't want to do it would be more willing to cooperate if any benefits they receive were withdrawn if they refuse or don't respond to a summons? Obviously I'm not including people who defer by negotiation.

DGRossetti · 04/09/2018 16:05

Why do so many mumsnetters bow down to authority?

Isn't that the role of women in any society ? Certainly England 2018 ?

IrmaFayLear · 04/09/2018 16:21

Streuth.

Not every trial is a rape trial. And if it were, you'd still listen to the evidence and make a decision accordingly.

What selfish idiots some posters are.

It's a thing you do for society; I guess some people want all the benefits and none of the obligations. Gimme gimme gimmee. Poor show.