THE body which awards legal aid has denied obstructing the fatal accident inquiry into the George Square bin lorry accident by denying funding to families of the six victims.
The Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) said it had not been given the correct information by solicitors for the families of those who died when the Glasgow City Council vehicle went out of control in Queen Street and George Square two days before Christmas last year.
It added the officials had made the discrepancies known almost a month ago.
SLAB's defence follows revelations at the preliminary hearing into the tragedy that several of the families had yet to receive confirmation of legal assistance.
It has prompted calls from one solicitors' body to renew calls for streamlining and reform of the legal aid system, which it described as "incredibly cumbersome", warning it ran the risk of denying victims access to justice.
At Monday's hearing it emerged the family of Jacqueline Morton, who was killed in the tragedy on December 23 was at first refused Legal Aid. A lawyer acting for the daughter of fellow victim Gillian Ewing has been allowed to provide advice and assistance but does not yet have a legal aid certificate.
The lawyer for Jack and Lorraine Sweeney and their granddaughter Erin McQuade also described difficulty getting legal aid for the inquiry.
During the hearing it also emerged the driver of the bin lorry, Harry Clarke, had been seen by a doctor following a "medical episode" four years ago. The GP who saw Mr Clarke along, with three other medics, will be called to give evidence.
Ms Morton's lawyer, Dorothy Bain, called for independent experts to assess the previous episode.
The names of the two co-workers also emerged during the hearing, with Matthew Telford and Harry Toal to give evidence.
They have described how they were trapped behind a metal safety rail at the back of the cab, which stopped them reaching the brake.
A SLAB spokesman said the body had liaised closely with the families' solicitors "to try and ensure speedy progress with the applications".
It confirmed it had received three applications, the first of which was granted on 1 May.
It said it had been unable to take decisions on the other two "as in neither did the solicitor provide all of the information we are required by law to consider".
The spokesman said: "In one case, the wrong information was submitted and in neither case were the necessary supporting statements provided.
"The first remaining application was received on April 20. We still await the correct information, despite confirming with the solicitor on April 29 that the wrong information had been provided.
"The other application was received on May 7. We advised the solicitor on May 8 that it was missing important information, meaning that the statutory tests for legal aid could not be applied.
"Necessary financial information remains outstanding."
He added: "There have been no unreasonable delays by SLAB in handling any of these cases, but we cannot take decisions unless and until the information required by law is provided to us.
"As soon as this is with us, we will progress the two remaining applications as quickly as possible."
But Ross Yuill, president of the Glasgow Bar Association (GBA), said reform of the criminal and civil legal aid system would be beneficial in such scenarios.
He added: "Trials in criminal cases and important procedure in civil cases can be delayed by the system, its incredibly cumbersome and very difficult for people to get their heads around. A far more streamlined system fit for purpose in 2015 would be of great advantage.
"What concerns the GBA is access to justice for people using the legal aid system because of the levels of bureaucracy. It can be simplified and made easier for the people who use the system. This is about fairness to individuals or families seeking access to justice."
Mr Yuill added that he believed there would likely be intervention by the court if the Sheriff Principal believed a delay in the grant of legal aid would impact on the FAI's start date. Particularly given the highly sensitive nature of this particular Inquiry.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.Â
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.Â
That is invaluable.Â
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article