Enhancing accessibility in written communications: A review of forms and letters for the Social Security Tribunal

1. “ TTY ”, “Appellant”, “high-speed internet connection” should offer specific minimum requirements so people can check their internet service to be sure ahead of time. Email submission of appeal is prone to typographical errors “info.sst-tss@canada.gc.ca”. Someone reading it to someone typing will almost certainly send personal information including attachments like bank statements and medical reports to the wrong email address so it’s important to make sure it’s simple and written in capital letters. Avoid using the letter ‘o’ as they can be confused with zeros.

1. Privacy and accessibility policies are not transparent, they refer to a hard-to-read piece of legislation and “CHRA and CCRF”. Comprehensive, yes, but it would take years to fully understand those documents. Quoting or citing pertinent sections and linking directly to them instead of just naming the Acts would be clearer and more relevant. Reasons for appeal should describe simple example text in a sentence or two to keep writers to the point and convey some expectation of proper approach to those unfamiliar with these types of proceedings. Outline what constitutes a “specialist’s report”. If I’m a professional, do I qualify as a specialist testimony or is a third party’s opinion required? How recent does a report need to be?
2. Other SIN – needs to be clearer because most would not know what this means. Division of Unadjusted Pensionable Earnings, or a Disabled Contributor’s
3. Appellant, contributor, hearing, representative, Tribunal member, reconsideration decision
4. Representative – needs more explanation. Who can do this, Why would you have one? What their duties/role is?
5. The term “reconsideration decision” needs a definition – it’s confusing.
6. Reconsideration – what constitutes a reasonable explanation – what constitutes a reasonable chance to succeed
7. Unclear how divisions are made or distinguished, and what their responsibilities are.
8. Needs to be more clear. “Application for leave”, without context that is not provided, means nothing to her. Something needs to outline relevance or contextualize it.
9. Hard to navigate legal terms and figure out what everything means. General division decisions are unclear.

1. Privacy and accessibility policies are not transparent, they refer to a hard-to-read piece of legislation and “CHRA and CCRF”. Comprehensive, yes, but it would take years to fully understand those documents. Quoting or citing pertinent sections and linking directly to them instead of just naming the Acts would be clearer and more relevant.
2. It would be helpful for some people to have a FLOW CHART as a visual representation of the process and where they are in it. I would use it and put in the DEADLINES and put it on the fridge. It could be helpful for people who don’t speak English.
3. Wordy, but doesn’t explain how to fill out the form.

1. Outline what constitutes a “specialist’s report”. If I’m a professional, do I qualify as a specialist testimony or is a third party’s opinion required? How recent does a report need to be?
2. On page 5, section 8, could there be a larger list of reasons the tribunal member will consider?
3. Some kind of statement advising appellants that although they don’t need a lawyer, many people do use a lawyer and they will be “going up against” someone with legal training.
4. First page of this form. Why is the tribunal only adding some decisions to CanLII? It must be all decisions then we have proof of who is not following legislative law or judge law/case law and who is just making up decision willy-nilly. This breaches fundamental justice. Vagueness. http://criminalnotebook.ca/index.php/Principles_of_Fundamental_Justice  Use this well team.
5. Tribunal – what it is, what it does, and who the members are could be explained.
6. Unclear how divisions are made or distinguished, and what their responsibilities are.

1. It would be helpful for some people to have a FLOW CHART as a visual representation of the process and where they are in it.
2. May also help to have contact info in the first section.

1. With important phrases, something needs to draw people’s attention to them so the importance is made clear.

1. The form assumes everybody is familiar with words like videoconference, high-speed internet. I assume many of the people filling out this form are senior citizens and are not familiar with such terms.
2. I don’t know how to make it work.
3. Hard to use the links within the form. Scrolling to the bottom just to get the contact info is inaccessible. It should be easy, especially with an SRL who is learning this for the first time.

1. It’s not clear what constitutes a ground for appeal that we should address but perhaps that is answered in one of the links.
2. Attempts to answer some questions, but could do a better job linking to further information, and of course explaining terms used (see above).
3. Terms were not defined enough.

1. If it is late, then there are a number of questions we are asked to address that are not all that clear. For example, how are we to answer whether a late filing would be unfair to someone else?
2. Documents – We need instructions on how to obtain documents. This is not common knowledge. There is often a lot of red-tape to get through to obtain our own records and a cost for them (Dr.’s charge for printing and admin fee for example). Advise on what is mandatory and what would be helpful.
3. I don’t know how to make it work.
4. Hard to use the links within the form. Scrolling to the bottom just to get contact info is inaccessible. It should be easy, especially with an SRL who is learning this for the first time.

1. If it is late, then there are a number of questions we are asked to address that are not all that clear. For example, how are we to answer whether a late filing would be unfair to someone else?
2. Attempts to answer some questions, but could do a better job linking to further information.
3. On page 1, it says, “You must provide all the information below. The Social Security Tribunal Regulations require this.” An explanation as to why would be good. Where they say that they publish decisions, provide a link to those published so that appellants can get an idea of the decisions. In the second from last paragraph, they could elaborate the role of the Tribunal. On page 2, instead of Appellant’s SIN , say “Your (Appellant) SIN ”, instead of Other SIN , say “Associated SIN”. Have tick boxes for the options. On page 3, section 5, should “I don’t remember.” be an option? It is unlikely that someone won’t have a decision and could have people attempt to skip this step. On page 7, examples of supporting documents could include court documents/decisions and a caveat not including too much information.
4. Reconsideration Decision – more info needed. Let appellant know they have already received this letter, identify it with a form # maybe? 2. Statement about requires all information: explain better – what happens if you don’t fill it all out? Make statement more friendly – such as: “in order to make the best decision, we need as much information as possible”. Section 6: Can you give some samples or examples of language to use here? Or more direction on what you are actually looking for? It shouldn’t be a secret. Appellants know they are going up against a huge bureaucracy and government lawyers. We need help! Section 7: Documents – We need instructions on how to obtain documents. This is not common knowledge. There is often a lot of red- tape to get through to obtain our own records and a cost for them (Dr.’s charge for printing and admin fee for example). Advise on what is mandatory and what would be helpful. Section 9: Representative – the form says you don’t need one, but people do use lawyers. A handbook for people wanting/needing to self-represent is essential.
5. Unclear what the length of the accommodations could be.
6. A resource guide or workbook providing more basic info would be useful. More context around the process would also be helpful, i.e., who the audience and who the members are.

1. Hard to use the links within the form. Scrolling to the bottom just to get contact info is inaccessible. It should be easy, especially with an SRL who is learning this for the first time.

1. Asks appellant to give email address, but then an immediate statement saying we are not responsible to keep your information safe! Does this have to go here? Feels very discouraging.

1. Cover page: “You must provide all the information below” should state “on the attached form” instead of below.

1. Most of it is fine, but I made notes of where improvements could be made in my commentary above. The “Navigator” designation is needlessly wordy.

1. It is a reasonable length, but it should link out to sources for further information.

1. Most people hate filling in forms – 7 pages are a bit much. The late appeal can be shortened and could be a little flexible with the timing.
2. A bit wordy. 1st para. for example could be To have your decision reconsidered submit this form within 90 days.
3. Je pense que le formulaire est un peu trop long.

1. The “If you have questions” info is all squished together and is hard to decipher. It should be better spaced. I see that information is better presented on the last page
2. Overall it was good, but the font could be larger. Flowchart was illegible when printed.
3. Fan of bold fonts for titles and more use of bullet points. Question and answer format is helpful. Some dense areas need to be “broken up” better to avoid losing important info.
4. Shading, colour coding, fillable boxes, bolding, asterisks, mandatory fields, etc. could help indicate importance.

1. Where there are choices to be filled out, there is no obvious place or way to select them. A box to check in front of each choice would help. Also, where there are a series of boxes to fill out, such as about address, the tab takes you to the next box, but not a great place to fill it out – it should deposit us in the area beneath the heading not next to it.
2. Mostly fine – small problem with couple of checkboxes, see below.
3. Would be useful to have a portal including a checklist giving next steps.
4. Shading, colour coding, fillable boxes, bolding, asterisks, mandatory fields, etc. could help indicate importance.

1. It should provide for e-signatures and for completion online, some don't have computers, and/or printers and scanners.

1. Makes an attempt at plain language, but needs to do a better job explaining terms, processes, options, etc.
2. However, some things can be explained in more accessible language (such as “reasonable”).
3. Language was not plain/clear. If some terms, definitions, etc. cannot be included in the body, they should be linked or in a dropdown box.

1. Forms were inaccessible and required supplementary googling, which shouldn’t happen – she is a social worker with a Master’s degree (“If I can’t understand it, how can someone with more barriers understand it?”) Infographics are a good idea, this one was too busy. Checklist might also be a useful opportunity for SRLs to reflect on whether they’ve submitted everything they need.
2. Too overwhelming. Information should be point form, simplified, and there must be more access to resources. Unreasonable to go through when already stressed out with other things.

1. Could link to resources for further information.
2. The section “tips” is very useful though it could include hyperlinks to resources.
3. Would appreciate more info about what documents are, examples of them, what they entail, etc.
4. If some terms, definitions, etc. cannot be included in the body, they should be linked or in a dropdown box.
5. Some concerns about what the navigator role entails.

1. [Translation] There are spelling mistakes on page 5.

1. Nice and big. I never seen a form like this better.

1. Clearly laid out. Was accessible to me.
2. Seeing a visible representation or flow chart would be helpful to disabled people and non-English speakers, and could provide more info about expectations.
3. Infographics are a good idea, this one was too busy

1. I did not have to follow a link or look for form myself, so a quick completion time. 30 minutes to read and answer questions.

1. I didn’t have a problem, but I suspect folks with less legal literacy might.
2. Section 6 and 7 were too open ended. Give options or examples.
3. Hard to know what info to input. Not enough room for the “reasons to appeal”.

1. Because I have done appeals, I know organizations have internal codes i.e., section 7.3 that explains that there are extensions to limitations and may list viable reasons for delays. I don’t think it’s fair that this information is typically hidden from the applicant. In my experience, people are dissuaded from appealing. I was pleased to see that it did provide some legal reasons addressing limitations in lay terms however. I just did this with Stride/John Humphries and they all told me I could NOT ask for an extension. I found the sections of the Act stating I could. They agreed I was right but would NOT advocate for me even though they were the “authorized representative”. The volunteer told me to do it even though I was stressed to the max and then basically revoked her authorization by emailing the HRC and saying that she may have misrepresented because she was just amplifying my voice and I was advocating for myself and to CC me (as if they wouldn’t). They stopped CC’ing her and I was essentially standing there with having been pants.
2. Concerned over terms and processes beyond the form, like who to ask next or how to know if a judicial review is needed.

1. Not enough room for the “reasons to appeal”.

1. Should link to Service Canada Centres so people can see if there is a location close to them. Clicking on “videoconference” under hearing preferences also checks the in- person box, and vice versa. I assume this is a technical glitch with the form?
2. Time for the government to start supplying emails under government security website for those that cannot have provincial email?

1. I feel that the privacy concerns could be addressed better.
2. Might be good to include a list of examples of accommodations – people may not be aware of what they can ask for, but those might be really helpful accommodations for them – could link to an external resource. Would be very helpful to include more information/link to a resource about how to write your reasons for appeal – what kind of language to use, sample examples, what kinds of reasons would be likely found acceptable, what wouldn’t, etc. That’s a very daunting big blank box, with no prompts or help given. Could link to a longer list of supporting documents examples – perhaps also include what types of documents, if any, would NOT be seen as acceptable. Link to resource/give examples of acceptable reasons for a late application, as well as what type of evidence the Tribunal would accept in this regard, and what criteria would make a member think that your appeal “has a reasonable chance of success”. Again, a resource on representatives could be really helpful – who can act as your rep, how you should choose them, what they need to know/do, etc. (Especially when the rep is not a legal professional.)
3. There should be a caveat in section 10 “If you have a representative” that tells the appellant how to revoke a representative if needed/wanted. There should be a website option to submit the appeal that provides an e-receipt.
4. Per the above experience, I think there should be an Authorized Representative form attached so people don’t have to ask or go searching for it. And maybe a list of forests where one can find such a unicorn.
5. Video conference, where is contact information/persons, for centers. Links? Section 8 page 5 adds a link to enactment and link to case law (show examples) of what is being confirmed by case law to be acceptable reason to be appealed, then make them legislated laws.
6. [Translation] It would be nice if section 4 (adaptation measures) offered an option to tick a box (as is the case elsewhere in the form) vis-à-vis adaptation measures; for example, “I use a wheelchair”, “I’m blind”, etc. This would allow the Tribunal to intervene without necessarily forcing people with disabilities to do more work to organize accommodations. The option to contact the Tribunal directly would remain the same depending on situations that are more complicated or where the Tribunal does not immediately offer options on the form. 

1. Well laid-out.
2. Page 3 , said add any extra pages you need. This should be an ongoing fillable section on this form with unlimited space. Why the extra page hassle? A deterrent?
3. Formatting could be better.

1. Many people do not know what the legal definition of jurisdiction means. What does this mean – “appeal a General Division summary dismissal decision”?
2. The form does try to explain some terms, but could definitely do a better job. Other terms and phrases that need definition/context: summary dismissal decision, other parties, applicant, oral testimony, appeal division member (definition could be more blunt – i.e., “acts like a judge”), hearing, testimony, and representative.
3. “Apply for leave” is not a clear term. “Summary dismissal decision” is not a clear term.
4. Summary dismissal decision, this needs to be explained.
5. Misses explaining what a “leave to appeal” is, its meaning is not self-explanatory.
6. [Translation] Interject.
7. [Translation] It would also be useful, even if it seems obvious, to give a definition of claimant.

1. There really should be a section or resource that they could link to that explains the structure of the SST: what is the General Division, what is the Appeal Division, etc.
2. On page 5, section 8, could there be a larger list of reasons the tribunal member will consider?
3. [Translation] See my comments on letter #6 vis-à-vis clarifying definitions of reasons for appeal.

1. Looks good, no comments on this document other than serif font, email formatting, etc.

1. How hearing (virtual or otherwise) might work, what accommodations might be available, are not really exchanged, so the decision as to which I might want is made on the basis of all sorts of assumptions on mine.
2. A note RE: muting phone and having good reception if on a mobile phone.

1. Section 5 assumes that everybody knows about administrative law because most people would not know what the terms mean – error of fact, error of law, procedural fairness, error of jurisdiction.
2. Need to clear up legal language and terms. #5 (shaded box info) is very helpful.

1. On page 1, section 1, should “I don’t remember.” be an option? It is unlikely that someone won’t have a decision and could have people attempt to skip this step.

1. How hearing (virtual or otherwise) might work, what accommodations might be available, are not really exchanged, so the decision as to which I might want is made on the basis of all sorts of assumptions on mine.
2. The form tries, but I think people are likely to still have questions and confusion over how to write about their reasons for requesting an appeal. It would be so helpful if the form linked to a resource that explained in more detail the four reasons, and gave more examples of circumstances where they would apply. Same goes for the “late” section – what is a “reasonable” explanation for being late? What kinds of supporting documents would acceptably prove your reasonable explanation, or that you always intended to apply? I think the form could also link to a resource with greater details about “representatives” – see below in general comments.
3. On page 3, unpack why new evidence can’t be adduced. More examples could be added. Also, is there an opportunity to suggest seeking legal advice here?
4. We publish many decisions… a link to decisions or to a page with samples of decisions, helpful. Relied on the wrong section of the law... what sections apply, a link here would be helpful. Parties generally can't submit new evidence, under what circumstances could they? Examples or a link to a webpage with examples would be helpful.
5. In the “reasons” for appeal, it seeks to define what the reasons might be with examples. This may not be very helpful as it doesn’t show the real meaning of those reasons. A hyperlink to a resource explaining what things are (like what procedural fairness is), would be a lot more helpful than making one single example.
6. [Translation] Excellent for the most part. However, I recommend the same thing I indicated on form #1 regarding accommodations for people with disabilities.

1. [Translation] I think it would be useful to add a table of contents. For example, “this form is made up of several sections: (1) the decision you want to appeal; (2) claimant contact information/resource person contact information… etc.” This would immediately make sense of the length of the form and make it easier to see how many fields must be completed.

1. Most of it is fine, but I made notes of where improvements could be made in my commentary above. The “Navigator” designation is needlessly wordy.

1. [Translation] I think the form is a bit too long.

1. Could be a bit longer to allow for further information (see above and below), but I think it might be more practical to hyperlink to further resources that provide greater detail/explanation.

1. Form seems to work visually pretty well and to function fine as a fillable PDF.
2. Pleasing and easy to read. I like sections and headings in bold vs. non-bold fonts.
3. Very visually pleasing and easy to read, despite the font size in the body. Being visually challenged, I find many legal documents are difficult to read once printed.

1. Nicely organized.

1. An attempt has definitely been made to make the form more user-friendly. But it would be significantly improved by the inclusion of more and more detailed plain language definitions, examples, etc.
2. Fix up legal terms and it will be good. Or provide a user's guide.

1. Again, linking to further resources would be very helpful.

1. Did not know what the term leave means or summary dismissal decision and whether it applied to my situation.

1. [Translation] In part 6, last question “do you have a reason for preferring this option?” does this refer to an in-person hearing mode or any choice of hearing mode?
2. [Translation] Other SIN/SIN of the contributor

1. There should be a caveat in section 10 “If you have a representative” that tells the appellant how to revoke a representative if needed/wanted. There should be a website option to submit the appeal that provides an e-receipt.
2. Mostly it was about justifying the appeal or its lateness – fuller understanding of what might make the application valid or the lateness acceptable would help. I am not sure for example sure of how my late application might disadvantage others.

1. It must be remembered what the average age is of the person filing out this form. The 90-day period should be more flexible and video conferencing should be better explained.
2. If they expect you to call to make accommodation requests, links should be hyperlinked. Really good that they provide the toll-free line people can call for help with the form, and that that info is in bold right at the top of the form. Should link to website for Service Canada in the section that gives this option.
3. Video conference, where is contact information/persons for centers? Links?

1. There is no clear title for this form on the cover letter.

1. Should provide contact info re: accessibility where you put that question; also it looks like they’re saying to write about your accessibility needs there, but there’s not a fillable area to do that – language should be clearer, if they expect you to call to make accommodation requests; link should be hyperlinked. Also might be good to provide examples of disabilities and types of accommodations – might not be immediately obvious to everyone (especially those whose first language isn’t English/French) what those terms mean, and they may miss out on asking for something that could really help them. Really need examples of reasons arguments – how would a lawyer write this section? What kind of language might they use, etc.? Really good that they provide the toll-free line people can call for help with the form, and that that info is in bold right at the top of the form. Should link to website for Service Canada in the section that gives this option. Seems like people are allowed to have a representative other than a legal service provider – might be nice if this were stated more explicitly, and a link provided to a resource about different types of representative/how to choose a representative/what is expected of them (if they’re not a legal pro), etc.
2. Video conference, where is contact information/persons, for centers? Links? Section 8 page 5 adds a link to enactment and link to case law (show examples) of what is being confirmed by case law to be acceptable reason to be appealed, then make them legislated laws.

1. Page 3, said add any extra pages you need. This should be an ongoing fillable section on this form with unlimited space.

1. If printing is required for the hearing, some options should be offered as many people are unaware of how to upload documents to a printing company and order secure documents online. Someone may assume they have a working printer then have technical issues when trying to print at home, a link to tech support forums online or advice in how to search or advising readers that libraries offer these services would be helpful.

1. “Navigator” is needlessly complicated and repeatedly obfuscates the role of the individual. A more common word is ‘facilitator’ or ‘appeals assistant’ or ‘guide’ or ‘coordinator’. A navigator is someone who provides direction, if you’re not offering advocacy or legal representation then it’s not the word you want to use. A facilitator is someone who helps another find where they need to go. A coordinator is one to takes direction from others and organizes it to achieve everyone’s objectives.
2. Mostly. I would define who “other parties” might be (what makes someone a party).
3. Don’t know what “Employment and Social Development” is; “TTY” isn’t explained at the end; perhaps a refresher on what “Notice of Appeal” means might be helpful as well.
4. The letter is very simple and well laid out. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs.
5. First paragraph: “Employment and Social Development” is not ESDC. It should include “Canada”.
6. Appellant, Tribunal, advocate, document (what's included), representative.

1. Tribunal file number should be in the letter itself where it says to write it on the first page of each document. With all these letters, forms and attachments it can be disorienting for people unfamiliar with the process to cross-reference. Since I presume the letter is mail-merged, it should be easier to include it in the directions than make the appellant second guess themselves and look around, even though it’s already in the letter’s header on the previous page. This is stressful and confusing times to people in the process, looking around through pages can quickly lead to mental fatigue. Also, where it says “Write the Tribunal File Number on the first page of each document you send” it should also remind the reader that it is on the previous page, as the ‘contact us’ portion states “the address is at the top of this letter” a few sentences prior. “How to contact us” on page 3 has empty space where the mailing address could be reiterated for convenience as well, instead of spread across 3 pages of dense but important info.
2. The letter is very simple and well laid out. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs.

1. See comments above for suggestions on improving, such as swearing in, witnesses, terminology, distribution of pertinent content on the page header / re: subject line, etc.

1. The task of preparing a binder for the hearing is imho a level of detail better left to the Navigator. Same with discussion on how to send documents to the Tribunal. There's a lot of content in this letter. (Everything from the intro of navigator to discussion of contact info could be taken out and put in follow-up from navigator, who can ensure the delivery is appropriate and points are understood.)

1. I think this letter actually does a very good job of providing straightforward initial information, without overwhelming. But I think it would be nice if it suggested or linked to further resources if the appellant wants to learn more.
2. People will always have unanswered questions and this is by and large pretty good. What struck me the most however was there was no clarity about how long anything might take.
3. See comments above for suggestions on improving, such as swearing in, witnesses, terminology, distribution of pertinent content on the page header / re: subject line, etc.
4. Explain why English and French are only allowed. Unpack the consequences of missing a hearing instead of just saying “the Tribunal may decide the appear without you being involved.”
5. Unanswered question - Letter directs reader to print documents to have in front of them for a hearing. My first response was, “Yikes! A hearing. What will that entail?” and immediate stress/worry about having to prepare for a hearing against the government lawyer. Some info about when a hearing would happen and information about hearings is important here.
6. It could provide a link to where someone who needs legal advice might get it together w # and give an example of what constitutes legal advise or provide a link to expand and give examples.
7. What is the time frame to a decision? − What happens then – successful, then what/ rejected, then what − Do these rules come from somewhere? Could links be provided?
8. [Translation] Is the navigator mandatory to complete the appeal process? Is it possible to come to the Tribunal with digital copies of the documents (for example on an iPad), or do they absolutely have to printed?

1. Your navigator is Melissa, they can be reached at ## or emailed at xxx provide link.

1. I like the bold font headings.
2. Although the information would suit bullet points which are an aid to understanding. The blocks of text are a bit daunting.

1. Mostly. Even though the address is at the top, all contact info should be in one part of the letter – so if at the bottom, repeat the address there.

1. As there is a navigator available, the intro letter could be pared down to basic information, such as timelines and expectations, and the rest left to the navigator to provide. That would accommodate any language or literacy barriers as the navigator should/would have a library of materials available to provide to the appellant to fill in gaps of knowledge or case prep.

1. More information about the process would be helpful - such as timelines, hearing expectations and how to prepare for this.

1. [Translation] I think that the letter is a bit too long. It would be better to be two pages long instead of three.

1. The letter could have some branding to make it look more formal. I had the impression that the letters were very basic.

1. The headings are good, but could be a little larger, or distinct in some other way (centred, coloured, bolded, etc.), to make them really easy to spot at a glance.
2. Font could be larger. Headings could be a bit larger than the body or more heavily highlighted or underlined.
3. It’s line spacing should be reduced to fit on 2 pages perhaps with larger gaps before each heading.
4. Narrative blocks are dense. There is info that suits bullet points.
5. [Translation] I like the format of the letter, but the subtitle font could be changed or just increase the font size.

1. Layout is good.

1. The length could be reduced with more of the information left for sharing from the navigator.

1. For the most part, definitely, with the exceptions in language outline above.

1. Adding for the Navigator by an extension number versus asking by name would be more helpful.
2. Additional information or links to where to find additional information would be helpful. A guide on how to self-represent would be very helpful.

1. [Translation] Well organized. At worst, I would add a few headlines (like “next steps” and “relevant information”).

1. Also it can be quite overwhelming for a self-rep to take all this info in at once. As you read it, you make a mental list of all the things to do and all the things to print off. Also, there’s a lot that you must keep in mind (such as only sending copies and not originals, saving copies for yourself). At the same time, one is questioning whether they will make the deadline, how much it’ll cost them to print all the material and what format they should follow. This can be overwhelming. Maybe it can help to say that all this info will be reviewed with a navigator that will help you come up with a plan/will give you tips on how to store your sensitive info and save copies.
2. No, the writing style uses too many pronouns – most of them unnecessary and some of them confusing.

1. No, the writing style uses too many pronouns – most of them unnecessary and some of them confusing.

1. No! It is just the facts. Very much a government letter, which is negative and directive. Some kind of statement about “we recognize that this is a stressful time for you, we want to make this as simple as possible, we are here to assist you”. People are generally distrustful of the government and feel that the odds are stacked against them in applying or appealing decisions and have had many bad experiences already of feeling that they or their circumstances don’t matter. Staff encounters are usually negative, staff are either indifferent, judgemental or act burnt out and bothered by applicants asking questions. If you want to convey a welcoming and encouraging tone, you will have to counteract that.
2. Not really. There is no “thank you for submitting” and too much “you must” and “you're responsible”. So for example, say, “In order for us to make sure that documents are filed correctly, we ask that you include the case number” instead of “you must”.
3. Could definitely be friendlier. Both begins and ends abruptly – especially the close of the letter. Some kind of short, encouraging closing paragraph, and a more obvious/recognizable signature (I did not immediately grasp that “Registry Operations, Secretariat to the Social Security Tribunal of Canada” was a signature line) would be more friendly and encouraging. The ending in particular is abrupt; I thought for a second that the last page might have been cut off.
4. It could open, Dear. Ms. and say please don't hesitate to call your Navigator, Melissa.
5. The shorter sentences sound robotic and commanding, not inviting. For example, “You can reach your Navigator by calling the toll-free number at the end of this letter. Ask for them by name.” Perhaps it is more friendly as, “You can reach your Navigator by calling the toll-free number at the end of this letter and asking for them by name.”
6. The tone and the content of the letter is very dry and only refers to the procedures ahead.
7. [Translation] Some sentences relating to certain “limits, constraints” to the process may seem cold – such as “this person cannot give you legal advice…”, “your documents must be written in French…”, “you are responsible for printing…”. Several of these sentences are imperative and appear to be orders and do not present a warm and encouraging tone.
8. [Translation] There’s nothing wrong with the tone of the letter, but a few extra little words (like “hello”, “thank you”, etc.) would make it a little less cold. 
9. [Translation] I think the letter can take on a warmer tone – the letter seems a bit “cold”.

1. The Navigator role is a novel approach to make the letter more welcoming, but I am not sure if Navigator is the right word. Assigned Agent? Case Worker? Assigned Tribunal Advisor?

1. My biggest suggestions are to improve the friendliness of the tone, and to suggest some further reading/resources.
2. The email subject line usually contains the trial number, but there was no direction concerning the format of that. If the initial email was given by SST, then if the appellant presses “reply all” it will be given to all parties, and with the proper “Tribunal File Number” in the subject line for easy query. If this isn’t a procedure, then just ignore this observation. Also, it doesn’t really state what the issue is, employment insurance, old age, or pension, so I couldn’t really tell what types of documents I would want to send in, but then you were very clear about the Navigator. I wish I had had a navigator going through the Supreme Court.
3. This letter seems crafted with plain language ideas in mind, but not using the rules.

1. [Translation] Some adjustments to be made in terms of the French translation, but we understand the meaning of the sentences.
2. Paragraph 3, page 2: there should be a comma between “below” and “under”.

1. My biggest suggestions are to improve the friendliness of the tone, and to suggest some further reading/resources

1. Mostly. Occasionally a jargonistic term slips in, such as “your file” or “parties” which most people will understand but is not how most of us talk.
2. More context around what “ESDC” is would be helpful. Good that “Tribunal member” is somewhat explained, although could be slightly clearer – people still might not get that they are essentially the judge. In the infographic, better clarity around roles (i.e., Tribunal member = judge, and representative = lawyer) would be helpful.
3. TTY
4. Parties – who are the parties to this process? (An appellant could think this includes witnesses.) “Participants are sworn in before they speak.” – What it means to be sworn in is not explained. Also the answer to question about formality that “Our hearings aren't formal,” the identity of the collective in charge of the hearings is not clear. I'd also be concerned about using a metric like “formality” because it means different things to different people, also not culturally shared − an interpreter is available if English or French is not the appellant's first language, but why does that matter? Couldn't one of these be their second or third language, so long as they have full comprehension? − Use of the verb: get (“get them translated” and “you will get”). This is one of the most confusing for people without full fluency in English, because it appears everywhere and means almost nothing (get sick, get a job, get home, get mad …). − On the issue of translations, there must be standards. You can't ask a neighbour to do it, right?

1. The letter is very simple and well laid out. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs.
2. “Participants are sworn in before they speak.” – What it means to be sworn in is not explained, and there should be an option of affirming, yes? Importance of telling the truth and seriousness of proceedings is not stressed. Also the answer to question about formality that “Our hearings aren't formal,” the identity of the collective in charge of the hearings is not clear.

1. [Translation] Excellent document – however, I note that I marked BBA on letter #2, which partially reproduces what is written in the first two pages of it. Please note my comments on the page for #2 in relation to pages 1 and 2 of this document. However, the new pages here are excellent.

1. Not sure how to answer this Q. The subject of the document is: “We received the documents related to this appeal from Employment and Social Development Canada,” but the content is more extensive, with an outline of the appeals process. So I would find this communication confusing.

1. Please include the name of all the documents the letter is referring to. If possible, could the letter link to a portal that houses the documents.
2. Refers to hearing options but did not answer the questions: “Do I arrange the hearing or accommodations in advance?”, If I show up at the government office, will they be expecting me? Will I have to explain a whole bunch of information to the front desk staff person?”. “Is there always a hearing?” When are there hearings? Why would there be a hearing?

1. Links to “swearing in” to describe what it means in real terms would be helpful to most who are not familiar with these types of proceedings.

1. Could add # you can reach your navigator at, instead of # at the end of the letter and link to email pg 1.
2. Links to “swearing in” to describe what it means in real terms would be helpful to most who are not familiar with these types of proceedings.

1. Useful, but the boxes under “Hearing options” are tall and thin, which breaks lines awkwardly in each bullet point since they all word-wrap. Some even have subsection bullets and there’s not enough room to easily read what applies to what. Headers for these blocks are inconsistent in font weight, size positioning, making it harder to read and follow. Narrow fonts are harder to read for the visually impaired and cause eye strain, simple familiar fonts like Times New or Courier are usually chosen for legal records to maintain a standard of legibility across mediums and platforms. Having wider blocks and 2x2 grid would be much easier to read than 1x4 grid. White on light blue is also hard to read. The numbers in the black circles denoting read flow are not uniformly centered, text sizes and alignments are inconsistent, and the svg graphics add nothing to readability in sections 3-8 but do compromise legibility.
2. Headings could be a bit larger than the body or more heavily highlighted or underlined.

1. Needs more information – See question 2

1. The “Has your contact information changed?” section is overkill. It was just in the Acknowledgement letter.
2. Needs more information.
3. It's not too long, but the information goes beyond the expectations set out in the subject heading. Instead of repeating instructions on submitting docs in multiple letters, it would make more sense for me as an appellant to have an instruction sheet outlining the steps for submitting documents, with photo samples of what is expected. (For example, when it says 'Write the Tribunal File Number …' does that mean it has to be hand-written? Someone who didn't know might think so.) This could be provided in other languages if needed, and I could keep it on hand as a reference while preparing submissions.

1. The letter could have some branding to make it look more formal. I had the impression that the letters were very basic.

1. See my notes on the “Acknowledgement of Notice of Appeal” letter. Same apply to this letter; the infographic is such an excellent inclusion, and I think it’s mostly great - one small suggestion would be to make the top a little less cluttered - there’s a lot of clipart hovering around the contact info (one piece is actually cutting off the text a little), and it makes it a little hard to read/visually overwhelming.
2. The attachment was a bit hard to read where there was white lettering against a light blue background—at least to my aging eyes.
3. The letter lay-out is generally OK, font could be bit larger but the graphic is unreadable to me once printed and plainly formatted for legal size paper, without utilizing the width available. The greyed areas are hardly readable for me after printing. Font needs to be larger.
4. Line spacing should be reduced to fit on 2 pages, perhaps with larger gaps before each heading.
5. The top-left pictures on the last page are overlapping a bit.

1. Would prefer bullet points and a simpler flow chart instead of the poster. The graphics seem too casual for a serious matter, although this is likely a matter of personal preference. Is it part of the mail-out? (I couldn't see where it is mentioned/referenced.)

1. Easy to follow and not overwhelming. Warming a calming layout that indicates understanding of the stressful situation.

1. Sort of. Could provide more info (as per question 2).

1. Good with the exception of the flow-chart

1. Could be better. A few more “pleases” and “thank you” and more “we will need” and less “you must.”
2. No welcome or context set, just dives right in; the infographic however does have a very friendly tone.
3. It could open, Dear. Ms. and say please don't hesitate to call your Navigator, who will be happy to help (or assist) you.
4. The shorter sentences sound robotic and commanding, not inviting. For example, “Always send copies of your documents and keep your originals in a safe place.”
5. [Translation] I think the letter can take on a warmer tone – the letter seems a bit “cold.”

1. The one thing that was a bit confusing (not extremely so) was the instructions about the call in option. Maybe a bit more specific: when you call in, you will be answered with a recording asking for a 3 digit extension which we will have provide you.” With an example maybe.

1. The first two pages of this are very similar to the “Acknowledgement and Notice of Appeal Letter” – see my comments there, same apply here i.e., abrupt beginning and ending, headings, references to further resources.
2. Hearing Options #1: under Important Information accommodation is unnecessary – perhaps just: “If you need special arrangements let us know as soon as possible. Examples are….”

1. [Translation] Some adjustments to be made in terms of the French translation, but in general very good (e.g., many breaks).  
2. Page 1, para. 4: there should be a comma between “below” and “under”.

1. Letter is clear and concise; flowchart needs to be more legible and accessible when printed.

1. The attachment is a nice touch and helps to explain.
2. The infographic is mostly excellent, and is such a great idea for inclusion. I hope there are more in the other letters!
3. I’m a very big fan of that hearing flyer. That literally made me feel like the process is inclusive, and less intimidating. Great job.
4. The information to be shared would be clearer with a different organization, with initial outines, and content filled in as needed by the navigator.
5. [Translation] I love the visual aids on page 3. Really great and easy to digest – would be good to see that on more documents too.

1. I'd prefer a more businesslike tone, and the heavy use of pronouns continues to be a problem.

1. The first two pages of this are very similar to the “Acknowledgement and Notice of Appeal Letter” – see my comments there, same apply here i.e., abrupt beginning and ending, headings, references to further resources.

Question 1: Are legal and other unfamiliar terms, abbreviations and acronyms explained?

1. Same comment as above with regard to the title “navigator”, it’s needlessly confusing and uninformative considering the capacity that person is able to engage is strictly informative and not representative of the appellant.
2. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs

1. I may have missed it, but this is the first instance of any mention of witnesses. It should be clearly outlined in prior documents / form submissions in the process. “Registry Operations” at the bottom of the last page should include contact info or link to a general information page explaining why it’s there and who that is. An address would be preferred, or comment that it is the same as the undersigned or something like that.
2. The letter is very simple and well laid out. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs

1. See comments above for suggestions on improving, such as swearing in, witnesses, terminology, distribution of pertinent content on the page header / re: subject line, etc.

1. See comments above for suggestions on improving, such as swearing in, witnesses, terminology, distribution of pertinent content on the page header / re: subject line, etc.
2. Point 1 – needs a better explanation – “This is ESDCs point of view, not evidence.”
3. There is confusion on the authorship of the letter. It says the following is a summary of 'our' discussion and then advises appellant to contact your navigator, as though this is not the person confirming the content of the conversation.

1. I would add something to the point made about the submission from the ESDC that acknowledges that the complainant may not like what is in it. Something like “we understand you may disagree with the point of view of the ESDC. We will be discussing your views and concerns at the hearing.”
2. I think this letter is a great resource for SRLs – being given something in writing confirming what you discussed with your navigator over the phone. But it might be helpful if the letter pointed you to further information/resources with embedded links.
3. Please include the name of all the documents the letter is referring to. If possible, could the letter link to a portal that houses the documents.

1. I would add something to the point made about the submission from the ESDC that acknowledges that the complainant may not like what is in it. Something like “we understand you may disagree with the point of view of the ESDC. We will be discussing your views and concerns at the hearing.”

1. Receiving Documents from the Tribunal might be more clear if it was Documents filed with the Tribunal.
2. There is a combination of document information and notice to proceed to a hearing. This is critical information that needs attention directed to it.

1. Page 1 heading 1 refers to #2, which should be moved above point 1. The heading should be: “Summary of our telephone conversation” then, “1. We discussed hearing details and the role of witnesses should you choose to have witnesses. 2. You confirmed that you are ready to proceed with the hearing. 3. If you would like to discuss anything in this letter, feel free to contact your Navigator, Melissa.”
2. This information suits bullet points, not narrative sentences.

1. It’s not exactly the order, but this is not the fourth letter which has the same boilerplate info about originals, means of contact, etc. That becomes annoying (of course I am reading these all at once). Could that not be in a box or an attachment about things to remember?

1. Since they discussed witnesses in their call, it might make sense to include a reminder of what witnesses are, how they work, how you go about selecting them, what is expected of them, etc.

1. Since they discussed witnesses in their call, it might make sense to include a reminder of what witnesses are, how they work, how you go about selecting them, what is expected of them, etc.

1. [Translation] I think that the letter is a bit too long – two pages instead of three pages would be ideal.
2. Too long and too chatty. Most of the length is repetition of contact info. This can be provided as a separate form, instead of presenting as though it's new info, which might be confusing to the reader, making them think they have to read through all this again.

1. Put only new information in follow up. Use a simple format of simple facts, instead of discussion clutter. Highlight critical points to confirm. (If I were an appellant, I think I could question the right of the Tribunal to proceed with a hearing date given this casual confirmation of a critical point under #3.)

1. I am sure someone with better graphic skills than me would make it look more appealing, but it works for me.
2. The letter could have some branding to make it look more formal. I had the impression that the letters were very basics

1. Put only new information in follow up. Highlight critical points to confirm.

1. Very clear, and a great thing to do, to send the litigant a letter summarizing the phone call.

1. I am not going to keep repeating this – but all of the letters could have a warmer more friendly tone. For example, this one could being with something on the order of “I am glad we had a chance to talk and to discuss your concerns with you. I hope this conversation was helpful to you and that will call if you have further questions.” Or something that is a bit more personal.
2. As with the other letters, it begins and ends very abruptly, with no greeting or sign off. This would go a long way to making the letters feel friendlier.
3. It could open, Dear Ms.…
4. A bit cold might benefit from including some sympathetic language.
5. [Translation] Again, the addition of simple words like, “hello” and “thank you” would help to give the formalities of this letter much more warmth.
6. [Translation] I think the letter can take on a warmer tone – the letter seems a bit “cold”.  Je pense que la lettre peut prendre un ton plus chaud – la lettre semble un peu « froid »

1. This is not abiding by plain language writing rules.
2. Also, re-emphasize the role of witnesses.
3. Resources could be prepared on numerous topics: a glossary of terms used at the tribunal, a list of people involved (i.e. members, navigators, representatives, etc.) and what their roles are, a primer on evidence (what it is and how to use/prepare it), etc.

1. It was unclear whether the appellant could reply to the submission in the text. I know they have the right to call the navigator, and the heading “ESDC submission and right to reply” implies the appellant can reply to the submission; but it’s not clear to me.

1. Under the Hearing details and Ready to Proceed section, is there an opportunity to embed the document that “confirmed” that the appellant was ready to proceed?
2. This letter feels like an opportunity to provide additional resources to litigants, as needed based on their phone conversation. Witnesses is a good example: SST could prepare a web page explaining what witnesses are, who they can be, how they work, etc., and then could link to that from these letters. Resources could be prepared on numerous topics: a glossary of terms used at the tribunal, a list of people involved (i.e. members, navigators, representatives, etc.) and what their roles are, a primer on evidence (what it is and how to use/prepare it), etc.
3. There might be some benefits to having a transcript or minutes of the conversation that might help a self-rep better follow the procedure ahead and the meaning of the things in the letter.

1. Comma between “below” and “under”, bottom of page 1. Page 2 line 1: “Always send copies of your documents and keep your originals in a safe place.”
2. It looks like there’s a space in the subtitle “ont -elles”.

1. The email for the teleconference troubleshooting is all caps, which is good except for the font is sans serif so the capital letter ‘i’ is unclear. Use a serif font and use a simpler email address. It can be set up to automatically forward to this more confusing address behind the scenes if you want but it’s pointless to have people try to type it in without making any mistakes. Also, the @canada.gc.ca should be consistent with the rest of the email address and the underline hyperlink should be removed. Demographics and stats suggest that almost nobody uses third party email software that those links are useful for, so invariably they wind up pulling up software that is not set up and is also distracting/confusing for users. Link to a website that guides people how to type in an email address instead if need be, but linking mailto: inside of forms is counterproductive for most people. Page 3: same comments as before about email addresses. Better use of white space and might as well have included the teleconference email address down there as well, to keep related information together.

1. Would helpful to be very explicit about what “business days” means – not everyone works a M-F day job.
2. Page 3 under attendance: what is a “member”?

1. “Your hearing will take place by ...” is redundant and less informative than the line that follows it, so might as well make the more informative line more prominent and cover that entire space of 3 paragraphs. The goal is to make things hard to miss and reduce mental fatigue so a clearly huge sentence with date, time, time zone, and “Social Security Tribunal” title should be the first thing eyes find at first glance.

1. The letter is very simple and well laid out. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs.

1. Should be bolder and much bigger font with the time and date. The email for the teleconference troubleshooting is all caps, which is good, except for the font is sans serif so the capital letter ‘i’ is unclear. Use a serif font and use a simpler email address.

1. “Your hearing will take place by ...” is redundant and less informative than the line that follows it, so might as well make the more informative line more prominent and cover that entire space of 3 paragraphs. The goal is to make things hard to miss and reduce mental fatigue so a clearly huge sentence with date, time, time zone, and “Social Security Tribunal” title should be the first thing eyes find at first glance. Page 2 questions should be separated on their own page so that the point-form important notes like meeting info, numbers and troubleshooting contacts are all that the reader needs are on a single page. If they need more information, they can pull out a second or third page but everyone will need that 1 page so spreading it across 2 and blending it into a third page makes it harder for the appellant manage a pile of papers and keep organized. Page 3: same comments as before about email addresses. Better use of white space and might as well have included the teleconference email address down there as well, to keep related information together.

1. See comments above for suggestions on improving, such as swearing in, witnesses, terminology, and distribution of pertinent content on the page header/re: subject line, etc.
2. I would like to see them elaborate more on the role of witnesses. Perhaps a few concise examples on how a witness would or would not be helpful.
3. Need a link to with an example for an ‘adjournment request’.

1. See comments above for suggestions on improving, such as swearing in, witnesses, terminology, distribution of pertinent content on the page header / re: subject line, etc.

1. I would like to see them elaborate more on the role of witnesses. Perhaps a few concise examples on how a witness would or would not be helpful.
2. There is a section that talks about asking for a new hearing and applying for the adjournment being granted. I think you should explain why or why not it may be granted. Are there some criteria used to make this decision? List them or give an example.
3. Interpreters being provided at no cost – is this just in official languages, or any language?

1. Most of these matters should have discussed and confirmed with questions asked in conversation with the navigator.

1. See comments above for suggestions to improve legibility.

1. There is repeated information again, and discussion of points that belong with the navigator.

1. It is a bit wordy.
2. Longer than needed with repetition of information, and discussion of points that belong with navigator.

1. The letter could have some branding to make it look more formal. I had the impression the letters were very basic.

1. Heading could be bigger, more distinct, to help with navigation.
2. I am sure it could be laid out in a more appealing way, but it worked for me.
3. Overall, very easy to read, well laid-out. Font could be larger, headings a bit larger than body or more heavily highlighted or underlined.
4. Less space between paragraphs, other than end of one paragraph and the next heading.
5. It’s very useful to have important deadlines bolded.
6. [Translation] This is a general comment, but incorporating more graphics, charts, etc. into these letters could certainly improve the digestion of information and the visual layout of them.

1. Use of narrative where point text more helpful.

1. Repetition with info, presented as though it's new.

1. It’s quite clear, with the exception of the business days meaning (see above).

1. The call-in instructions are clear, although some of the other entries are nonsensical for a personalized letter, as “Why is the hearing by teleconference?”

1. The section on requesting an adjournment for your hearing is nice and encouraging, but not the part about having to ask for an adjournment if 2 days or less notice. Perhaps changing it to “if you can’t attend at the last minute (2 days or less before the hearing date) due to an emergency, please call us.” Why does it have to be in writing? And is that realistic? What if you don’t have email? It won’t possibly get there on time.

1. Why is this important? Purpose should be the effective communication of important info. Warm and fuzzy doesn't help with that.

1. I don't think it is exceptionally welcoming but says what it needs to say.
2. This comes across as an unfriendly, demanding letter. Particularly in the part about rescheduling the hearing of necessary. You can say that you understand there may be occasions when the timing won’t work and you will try to accommodate if possible, or the like. This one sounded worse than a jury summons. The procedure makes sense but it really came across in a cold manner.
3. As with the other letters, it starts and ends very abruptly, with no greeting or sign off, and isn’t particularly friendly in tone.
4. The section on requesting an adjournment for your hearing is nice and encouraging, but not the part about having to ask for an adjournment if 2 days or less notice. Perhaps changing it to “if you can’t attend at the last minute (2 days or less before the hearing date) due to an emergency, please call us.” Why does it have to be in writing? And is that realistic? What if you don’t have email? It won’t possibly get there on time. Also feels like a power move which adds an unnecessary barrier. Also, using language like “grant your request” is using power imbalance language. You are really saying that the government will decide, you get no say, because we hold all the power. What if it’s a legitimate emergency situation? Why isn’t it a conversation to find a mutually convenient time. If there are laws that cannot be bent or changed, then you should explain that and soften the language.
5. It could open, Dear Ms....
6. [Translation] The letter doesn’t really take on a warm and encouraging tone, but I think it would be difficult to take on a warm and encouraging tone while detailing the same information.
7. [Translation] I think the letter can take on a warmer tone – the letter seems a bit “cold”.

1. A note RE: putting phone on mute while not speaking and if using speakerphone would be useful and avoid being in an area with poor cell reception if using mobile.

1. Ought to link to further resources and information that the litigant might find useful.
2. [Translation] “A witness is a person who accompanies you to the hearing and who can provide information to support your case.” (What information?)

1. I would say having the letter to 2 pages would be perfect. Versus 2 pages and a bit.

1. As with the other letters, this letter is clear and concise, but could be friendlier.

1. Comments on this document are same as already mentioned above relating to address and explanation of “Registry Operations”, email formatting/length/font/http, TTY explanation, and printing services or option of using the local library (perhaps even a link to a map search for the reader’s local library?).

1. All the terms used as to the grounds for appeal are not known by everybody unless they know something about Administrative Law – Procedural Fairness, error of jurisdiction, error of law, error of fact.
2. Comments on this document are same as already mentioned above relating to address and explanation of “Registry Operations”, email formatting/length/font/http, TTY explanation, and printing services or option of using the local library (perhaps even a link to a map search for the reader’s local library?).
3. “General Division” “Appeal Division” “leave to appeal” “grounds of appeal”.
4. Error of Jurisdiction – explanation of this is very confusing.
5. Yes except the term Judicial Review but there is a link and one can always ask Melissa or Alexa.
6. Procedural fairness – could be more clear like do you think the decision is unfair, if yes, please explain. Leave to appeal, should be explained as permission to appeal and reconsidered could replace the word appeal in that paragraph. Application for permission to have the decision reconsidered. To be granted leave, could be (to be allowed permission) could be in brackets.
7. Leave to appeal, being granted something, error of law, error of fact, procedural fairness
8. [Translation] The document should, before providing examples of these, explain in one or two sentences what procedural fairness, error of jurisdiction, error of law, and error of fact are. The examples help a lot, but adding a general definition of each concept is necessary and would greatly improve the understanding of an SRL.

1. More information and examples should also be provided on all of the grounds for appeal.
2. The letter is very simple and well laid out. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs.
3. Comments on this document are same as already mentioned above relating to address and explanation of “Registry Operations”, email formatting/length/font/http, TTY explanation, and printing services or option of using the local library (perhaps even a link to a map search for the reader’s local library?).

1. “Decision” isn’t useful information nor formatted as a header. It might as well quote the SST’s name, include the appellant and Tribunal File Numbers, and reference the date of the hearing or something that provides succinct summary pertinent detail rather than occupying space in a block of text then saying “above-noted appeal” to make the reader’s eyes dart around the letter for information.

1. See comments above for suggestions on improving, such as swearing in, witnesses, terminology, and distribution of pertinent content on the page header / re: subject line, etc.
2. Really could do a much better job of explaining all the terms listed above, how to appeal (e.g., link to the leave to appeal application), what the appeals process will look like.
3. GD, who are they? What is the applicable law the GD relied on?
4. It merely says that one of the reasons for appeal must be demonstrated. While it’s not the right place to explain how this can be done, a link to a resource explaining what takes place to an appeal process, might be useful. Also, providing examples to what these reasons are is not enough to understand what they mean. A link to what procedural fairness (etc.) mean would be useful.
5. [Translation] See my answer to question #1. It would also be helpful to provide some general instructions on how to review a decision to determine cause for an appeal. Despite the fact that the letter outlines several causes, it’s difficult for an SRL to know exactly how to look for such causes in the information provided to them.

1. The first paragraph is very confusing. Too many important things jumbled into a narrative.
2. The “short deadline” to appeal could be noted in terms of months like it is in other letters so people get a sense of what they are facing and don’t panic. One might assume the link takes them to a page called Judicial Review or Federal Court of Appeal, but my guess is it takes them to the La La Land of courts where they have to eventually find FORMS and then get stuck in Adobe-ville that holds documents hostage unless you can pay for Adobe. I have never been able to make it work and have to beg someone to send me an open document. Now with this cloud (thief) google docs – this is a professional persons thing. Most lay people do NOT use these things and they are very intimidating.

1. I know this is in the decision itself, but I imagine parties who receive an unfavorable decision would want to know why and who they could ask if they need any clarification or explanation of the decision and nothing is said about this.
2. Really could do a much better job of explaining all the terms listed above, how to appeal (e.g., link to the leave to appeal application), what the appeals process will look like. If it would make the letter too long to include all this, the letter should link out to this information.
3. Is there where a reference to get legal advice comes in? I find it can never be said too many times. Perhaps just before the bullet points after the second paragraph?
4. Reader is asked to submit an application to appeal – is this a specific form? If yes, link it right there. If not, give instructions on what format is acceptable to apply – a letter? An email? Give an example and very specific instructions on how to do this.
5. The “short deadline” to appeal could be noted in terms of months like it is in other letters so people get a sense of what they are facing and don’t panic.
6. Need a link to – with an example of said application for submitting an application for leave to appeal. Also needs time lines include with link to enact to prove the statement true.
7. Need a link to – with an example of said application for submitting an application for leave to appeal. Also needs time lines include with link to enact to prove the statement true.
8. Need a link to – with an example of said application for submitting an application for leave to appeal. Also needs time lines include with link to enact to prove the statement true.
9. [Translation] It would also be helpful to provide some general instructions on how to review a decision to determine cause for an appeal. Despite the fact that the letter outlines several causes, it’s difficult for an SRL to know exactly how to look for such causes in the information provided to them.

1. 90 days to appeal should be separated, bolded, highlighted. The first paragraph is too wordy and uses the word “appeal” too many times.

1. See comments above for suggestions on improving, such as swearing in, witnesses, terminology, distribution of pertinent content on the page header / re: subject line, etc.

1. Yes but it is anxiety provoking because you have to open the links and read bla bla bla to figure out what happened. There should be (2) letters 1) CONGRATUALATIONS you’re having a future 2) YOUR RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THIS HORRIBLE DECISION.

1. There is a section for the decision, but not for appealing the decision

1. Bullet points are nice, bolding font to highlight important things is nice.
2. See comments above for suggestions to improve legibility.

1. Yes but it is anxiety provoking because you have to open the links and read bla bla bla to figure out what happened There should be (2) letters 1) CONGRATULATIONS you’re having a future 2) YOUR RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THIS HORRIBLE DECISION.
2. One statement in bold saying: Here is the decision. Then clear language that says: If you don’t agree with this decision, here are the next steps (timeline, application instructions). Then, here are the reasons we will re-consider in format you already used.

1. Mostly. It is abrupt in the sense that there is one sentence about the decision and immediately goes to now to appeal. This feels jarring. Something like, we are including information about how to appeal in case you would like to do that. Or anything that just creates a friendly sounding segue.

1. Could really use more information – see above.
2. The letter needs either some reference to a source of decisions (e.g., CanLII) or an attachment. The letters are simplified for accessibility, so I wonder how those who need it so would find law and information that would help them present their case.
3. More explanation to the things mentioned above would have been useful.

1. Unhelpful to have full sentences instead of bullet points, too much repetition (General Division).

1. Overall length is okay. Clean up first section (paragraph).
2. Unhelpful to have full sentences instead of bullet points, too much repetition (General Division).

1. More explanation to the things mentioned above would have been useful.
2. The letters are simplified for accessibility, so I wonder how those who need it so would find law and information that would help them present their case.
3. Could really use more information – see above.

1. There’s a section for appealing the appeal.

1. The letter could have some branding to make it look more formal. I had the impression that the letters were very basic.

1. Headings could stand out more.
2. Font could be larger, headings a bit larger than body or more heavily highlighted or underlined.
3. Closer line spacing between paragraphs, not between end of one section and the next heading.

1. Better that there are bullet points, but they are not used well.

1. Least clear letter I’ve reviewed so far. A decent attempt is made to illustrate the different grounds for appeal, but this could go much further. And other terminology should be explained much better.

1. A decent attempt is made to illustrate the different grounds for appeal, but this could go much further.
2. I think Melissa’s phone number should be on ALL the documents in case someone goes into melt down mode.

1. Too wordy.

1. This continues to be the main problem here. Just the way it reads (and does not have to read) seems like you don’t really care—just trying to follow procedures.
2. I don't think it is exceptionally welcoming but says what it needs to say.
3. Again, no greeting or conclusion, the letter begins and ends very abruptly, as with all of these letters. And this one is “scarier” than the others I’ve reviewed so far, with very little encouragement to the reader, and a lot of legal jargon.
4. Not too bad once that first section is cleaned up.
5. Not to me personally. Its ominous because it puts you in GUESS MODE – did I win or lose and then you have to go search for the answer to that question.
6. It could open, Dear Ms....
7. A bit cold, might benefit from including some sympathetic language
8. [Translation] The letter doesn’t really take on a warm and encouraging tone, but I think it would be difficult to take on a warm and encouraging tone while detailing the same information.
9. [Translation] See the comments I noted about tone in the other completed checklists.
10. [Translation] I think the letter can take on a warmer tone – the letter seems a bit “cold”.

1. Page 1, Line, 1 paragraph 2 maybe change to: “Any party to the appeal who disagrees with the General Division’s decision may request permission to appeal to the Appeal Division of the Tribunal”

1. [Translation]“Any party to the appeal who wishes to appeal the decision of the General Division may request permission to appeal by filing an application for permission to appeal to the Appeal Division within 90 days of the date the decision was communicated to them.” If possible simplify or shorten.

1. This didn't give the appellant a link to the appeal form for the "Appeal to the Appeal Division of the Tribunal." It just said you could appeal. If it’s attached with the decision, ignore this.

1. Last sentence page 1: replace “that said that” with “saying”. Page 2: comma between “below” and “under”.

1. Having read a number of these letters now, I’m starting to tire of the boiler plate format of the last page, and I can imagine SRLs reading that over and over would get pretty tired of it. That is important info that ought to be included, but it seems to me now that it might be better in a call-out box, or postscript, or some other visual location within the letters.

1. Having read a number of these letters now, I’m starting to tire of the boiler plate format of the last page, and I can imagine SRLs reading that over and over would get pretty tired of it. That is important info that ought to be included, but it seems to me now that it might be better in a call-out box, or post script, or some other visual location within the letters. It’s a really repetitive, unfriendly way to end all of these letters, rather than with information tailored to the specific content of the letter, and a more friendly concluding paragraph.

1. “General Division” “Member”
2. Leave to appeal
3. Except “member” – is this a member of the Appeal Division tribunal?

1. The letter is very simple and well laid out. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs.

1. The big question unanswered is under what circumstances might a late appeal be granted and can the applicant do any further explanation of why it was late.
2. Doesn’t really give much on what the litigant could do to receive further information or clarification. Can they contact their Navigator? Who should they call?
3. Need a link to enactment on every letter sent. One should not have to get information off another letter or form. Need link to all reasons A SRL can appeal a decision on. with examples on why it is a reason to appeal.
4. Can further documents, affidavits or other evidence be filed at this point? If yes, what should we do? Do we contact Melissa...? Or ... who can answer our questions, anyone at those #?
5. Assuming there is evidence of late submission (by email). If not there should be an invitation to disagree.
6. What goes on into the decision to allow a late filing. Link to this may be useful as a self- rep can begin to plan their next move.
7. [Translation] The letter should explain under what circumstances the Tribunal normally allows late applications. This should also be covered in the decision letter (letter #6).
8. I wondered what factors are used to make the decision to grant and allow late application. I also wondered who (not specifically their names, but professional make up) the members are that will be making the decision. Is there anything I can do or contribute to affect the decision at this point?

1. This would be a letter that could carry a heavier tone since it is late.

1. I think it lacks information.

1. I’m a big fan of bullet points and bolding important information.

1. It’s very short.

1. Could really use more information, or links to more information, and explanation of some of the terms used.

1. The chattiness and overuse of pronouns is still a problem.

1. I think it lacks information.
2. Could really use more information, or links to more information, and explanation of some of the terms used.
3. It does not provide enough information.
4. [Translation] There should be more information on late applications, general process undertaken by the Division in response to late applications, etc.

1. [Translation] I think the letter is a bit too long – two pages instead of three pages would be ideal.

1. [Translation] The letter seems too short.
2. It is very short. I think it lacks information.
3. It does not provide enough information, so too short
4. Probably too short – could really use more information, or links to more information, and explanation of some of the terms used.

1. The chattiness and overuse of pronouns is still a problem.

1. The letter could have some branding to make it look more formal. I had the impression that the letters were very basic.

1. Headings could stand out more.
2. Bold and bullet most important info.
3. Font could be larger.
4. Smaller line spacing except between sections.

1. It’s pretty clear, but doesn’t explain a couple key terms.

1. It’s pretty clear, but doesn’t explain a couple key terms, or give options for further information or help.
2. Good but again, clear directions on who we can contact if we have questions would be helpful. How long until the member decides, when will I hear, can I follow up with someone, when should I do that?

1. What happened to the navigator?

1. What happened to the navigator?
2. Gives very little in the way of encouragement, or options for how to handle the situation. Is there anything they can do? Anyone they can speak to? A way to find out how this happened if they’re not sure?

1. As always, begins and ends abruptly with no greeting or conclusion. This is a particularly “scary” letter, since it informs the litigant of something they would have cause to be worried about, but gives very little in the way of encouragement.
2. Once again, there needs to be a lighter touch – it really sounds like we are being sent to the principal’s office for being late. This does not mean saying no worries we’ll accommodate the lateness, but it does mean saying that there reasons and concerns will not just be ignored but seriously considered.
3. I don't think it is exceptionally welcoming but says what it needs to say.
4. Change the tone, because the appellant is already potentially in jeopardy because of the late filing.
5. Full of power language. Members will “allow” or “grant” your request or not. Offering some explanation of the rules/laws governing the process helps people understand why the government is doing what they are doing. Example: There are policies/laws that are in place to ensure this is a fair process that we have to follow. Unfortunately, the law says that if we receive an application after the 90-day timeframe, then we have to evaluate the reasons using this set of criteria. Although, we recognize that sometimes things happen that are beyond your control, we are bound by this law. We are sorry for the additional stress this may cause you. Please contact your Navigator to discuss further. We are here to assist you and make this as simple as possible.
6. It could open, Dear Ms....
7. A bit cold, might benefit from including some sympathetic language.
8. [Translation] The letter doesn’t really take on a warm and encouraging tone, but I think it would be difficult to take on a warm and encouraging tone while detailing the same information.
9. [Translation] See my previous comments about the tone (adding words like “hi’, “thank you”, etc.).
10. [Translation] I think the letter can take on a warmer tone – the letter seems a bit “cold”.

1. All of these letters need to be written as if the person they were being sent to was neither stupid nor a complete pain in the neck.

1. Submissions and evidence have to be clarified it is not very clear here and how would the applicant know if and what errors were made?
2. “General Division”, “Appeal Division”, “decision”, “appellant”; defines submissions as “arguments” but I’m not sure that everyone would necessarily understand exactly what “arguments” are, or what they are comprised of. Explains that submissions aren’t evidence, but don’t really say what they actually are, or how to write one (could link out to a further resources on this). Would be good to explicitly definite “business days” (i.e., M-F).
3. What does Leave to Appeal even mean? Please change that title! And explain what this form/letter is for. Reference to Under Represented should be changed to Self- Represented.
4. Think the term Under-represented should be replaced with unrepresented or not represented.
5. Leave to appeal. Evidence.
6. The terms are explained with sometimes painful deliberation. (“This is called judicial review.”)

1. The letter is very simple and well laid out. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs.
2. Explain what this form/letter is for.

1. The terms are explained with sometimes painful deliberation. (“This is called judicial review.”) Are the writers presuming SRLs are incapable of reading regular business English? Is there a grade level they're aiming at?

1. The seventh paragraph uses the word under-respresentative. I had a big reaction to this. Please use self-represented party please.
2. I had so many questions! How do you ask a Federal Court to review? What is a judicial review? Why would I ask for a review? How do I ask for a review?
3. (Your arguments) might be more plainly written, tell us why you should have support, tell us your side of the story, give us your reasons along with any evidence to back up what you claim. As a general rule, no new evidence...under what circumstances might it be allowed, for example?
4. Evidence isn’t defined.

1. Sometimes this letter seems written specifically for the person who is appealing, at others for anyone who is party to this process, and this gets confusing at times. Maybe it would be better to have two separate letters.

1. I think this letter does a pretty good job of this, but as always, could provide links out to further information/resources.
2. The fourth paragraph talks about the short deadline to apply for a review of the decision. Provide more information about the short deadline.
3. I had so many questions! How do you ask a Federal Court to review? What is a judicial review? Why would I ask for a review? How do I ask for a review?
4. The link to judicial review, any rules and or regulations should be on a line of its own. So a SRL can easily copy and paste to the search bar. This should be the same for all links on all forms from any tribunal. Once again, the dead lines are not supplied and must be added to every letter where time limits are a factor.
5. There’s not enough about what constitutes a submission. A link explaining how it differs from evidence, and how to construct an argument (a maybe to effective legal writing) would be useful.
6. As a general rule, no new evidence...under what circumstances might it be allowed, for example?
7. [Translation] How long is the deadline for the “short deadline to ask the court for review of the decision…”?

1. I like the headings laid out in bold and posing questions. Nice style!

1. The number for Nicholas and his email could easily go in, as opposed to at the end of the letter.

1. Page 2 - Remove line saying, “We have scheduled your hearing…”. It’s already in the main headline.

1. There is too much critical information in one letter. The navigator needs to be helping at this point, and not at the next step.

1. There should be a lot more info in the ‘next steps’ section and links that expand on it.

1. There is too much critical information in one letter.
2. It should be more direct.
3. I think this one is too long and could edit down some parts. See page 2 second paragraph, edit away the last sentence, for example.
4. [Translation] I think the letter is too long – two pages instead of 5 pages would be ideal.

1. There should be a lot more info in the ‘next steps’ section.

1. It should be more direct.

1. The letter could have some branding to make it look more formal. I had the impression that the letters were very basic.

1. Headings could stand out more. Great use could be made of bullet points.
2. Font could be larger, headings a bit larger than body or more heavily highlighted or underline.
3. Close line spacing between paragraphs but not between sections.
4. Better use of sections, spaces, and headings, but critical information is not properly emphasized.

1. Critical information is not properly emphasized. For example, the navigator should be introduced as Navigator: Nicholas, Contact info: etc. Don't make people search through pages of text for the most important points. What comes next? Should be a timeline, not a section heading.

1. Pretty good use of plain language, but could go further in explaining unfamiliar terms (see above).
2. It assumes that a reader knows what an argument is, what evidence is and how each component (plus others) play into the making of an argument.

1. TMI

1. The sections starting with a question are good. For example: What comes next? And What should submissions include? Great!

1. TMI

1. As I mentioned above – start with the Title. What does that even mean?? Too many assumptions of legal terms and processes.

1. Info that closes the letters has become boilerplate, and ought to be in another location/format.

1. Same issues as with other letters – no greeting or conclusion.
2. Better than most – but still pretty impersonal.
3. I don't think it is exceptionally welcoming but says what it needs to say.
4. It could open, Dear Ms....
5. It is never welcoming or encouraging to make people work harder than necessary to understand what they need to know.
6. [Translation] The letter doesn’t really take on a warm and encouraging tone, but I think it would be difficult to take on a warm and encouraging tone while detailing the same information.
7. [Translation] See my other comments on the tone.
8. [Translation] I think the letter can take on a warmer tone – the letter seems a bit “cold”.
9. A bit cold, might benefit from including some sympathetic language

1. Something about muting your phone when you're not speaking or if you have it on speaker and if you use mobile, be sure you're in area with good reception.

1. Could the letter have a link to the letter that granted the appeal. Under “What should your submissions include?” section, there could be a guide that explains how to craft an argument and evidence. Under the paragraph “Contact us right away if you need to reschedule the hearing.” the sentence “Normally, you are only allowed one adjournment.” should be changed to say, “You are only allowed one adjournment except for exceptional circumstances.”
2. This is difficult because submissions are very difficult to explain, and because everybody’s case is different, it’s hard to explain the format. I know personally, the only way I was able to do my Supreme Court (Judicial Review) submission, and the one for the NS Labour Board, was by reverse engineering a submission I was given from a friend, that took the Fire Department to the Human Rights Commission. Without it, I would have been lost. Is there any way to include a sample submission for them to attempt a good response?
3. [Translation] In the section about the need for an interpreter, the sentence “you cannot ask a friend or a family member to accompany you to the hearing to act as an interpreter” should be added to be consistent with the reference to the need for an interpreter found in the other letters.

1. This is difficult because submissions are very difficult to explain, and because everybody’s case is different, it’s hard to explain the format. I know personally, the only way I was able to do my Supreme Court (Judicial Review) submission, and the one for the NS Labour Board, was by reverse engineering a submission I was given from a friend, that took the Fire Department to the Human Rights Commission. Without it, I would have been lost. Is there any way to include a sample submission for them to attempt a good response?
2. [Translation] In the section about the need for an interpreter, the sentence “you cannot ask a friend or a family member to accompany you to the hearing to act as an interpreter” should be added to be consistent with the reference to the need for an interpreter found in the other letters.
3. Interpreter part does not specify official languages or any language.
4. Could the letter have a link to the letter that granted the appeal. Under “What should your submissions include?” section, there could be a guide that explains how to craft an argument and evidence.

1. “Appeal Division”

1. The letter is very simple and well laid out. Perhaps add a link to this and all letters using inclusive language and add links to resources for SRLs.

1. What is a Federal Court review? What is a judicial review?
2. Judicial review, is it different from an appeal, if yes, how?

1. The discussion on next steps is a bit confusing. Two 'ifs' looks like two different choices. Also the term 'deadline' is idiomatic and also a bit confusing.

1. What is a Federal Court review? What is a judicial review? How do you initiate this? Why would I initiate this? What is the “short deadline” to apply for the review?
2. One question not answered is just how quick the timelines are regarding judicial review. It says very short – does that mean 48 hours, a week, a month, 90 days? Another is regardless of whether someone is satisfied or not with the decision, will there be anyone to answer questions about just what it means?
3. Hints at answers and does at least give a link to more info (although this should be hyperlinked), but could really be much more explicit in this letter. For example, what is the “short deadline”?
4. The link to judicial review, any rules and or regulations should be on a line of its own. So a SRL can easily copy and paste to the search bar. This should be the same for all links on all forms from any tribunal. Once again, the deadlines are not supplied and must be added to every letter where times limits are a factor.
5. Judicial review: Is it different from an appeal? If yes, how? What is the short deadline to apply? They could rather say what the deadline is.
6. There should be a targeted link to Judicial Review process and any online resources (information sheets).
7. It says that if you disagree you can apply for a review but doesn’t say how it says that there is a short deadline and then doesn’t specify the deadline it directs the reader to one single general link to find help. More links divide by topics would be a lot more helpful.
8. If there is a timeline specific info should be supplied (two weeks from receipt of letter - 3 months from decision)?

1. Any rules and or regulations should be on a line of its own. So an SRL can easily copy and paste to the search bar. This should be the same for all links on all forms from any tribunal.

1. Everything is all together in the same paragraphs. Headings after the notice of decision made be made such as “What you can do”, “Deadlines”, “Where to find help”.

1. Too short. Feels incomplete.

1. Provides very little information about next steps, especially if the litigant wants to appeal.
2. Feels like it’s missing a bunch of important information.
3. It could be longer with a snapshot of what a judicial review is.
4. More direction on judicial review process is necessary – maybe an attachment.

1. Headings to space out topics.

1. Sort of. This is very short.
2. Very short, provides very little information about next steps.
3. Too short, feels like it’s missing a bunch of important information.
4. It could be longer with a snapshot of what a judicial review is.

1. It conveys the necessary information but it starts and ends abruptly.

1. Add in links to supporting information where possible.

1. The letter could have some branding to make it look more formal. I had the impression that the letters were very basic.

1. Use bold and bullets for important info.
2. The font could be larger.
3. Everything is all together.
4. Could use bolding to help find info.

1. No headings.

1. Too short.

1. I suppose what’s there is fairly clear, but there is so little info that it’s hard to judge.

1. See above comments – too short.
2. It’s good but only because there is so little to it.

1. I imagine litigants would have questions about reading their decision, positive or negative, and this letter provides very little in the way of answers or information.
2. No – leaves too many questions, feels like someone didn’t finish the letter.

1. No – leaves too many questions, feels like someone didn’t finish the letter.

1. Once again: abrupt beginning and end with no greeting or conclusion. There is nothing encouraging about this letter, there is very little of anything about this letter, it is very short.
2. See number 4 above. This is presumably the last letter from the appeal division they will receive, something about thanking them for participating or cooperating or something would be nice.
3. I don't think it is exceptionally welcoming but says what it needs to say.
4. No niceties at all.
5. “Dear Ms.” would be nicer.
6. Because of the little info used it reads as dismissive, which hinders one’s understanding of his right to apply for judicial review.
7. [Translation] See my other comments on the tone.
8. [Translation] I think the letter can take on a warmer tone – the letter seems a bit “cold”.

1. Reflecting on all the letters: they follow a very similar pattern, and the biggest improvements to them all would be adding greetings and conclusions, explaining ALL unfamiliar terms and concepts, and providing hyperlinks to webpages and resources with further information. The one infographic is such a great example of what could be done here - more of this, please!
2. there could be a guide to how to read a judicial decision and what commonly used terms (such as caselaw/ finding/ test) mean

1. Reflecting on all the letters: they follow a very similar pattern, and the biggest improvements to them all would be adding greetings and conclusions, explaining ALL unfamiliar terms and concepts, and providing hyperlinks to webpages and resources with further information. The one infographic is such a great example of what could be done here – more of this, please!
2. This just doesn’t have a link to the Supreme Court, or Federal Court Judicial Review site so they can file. This was all completely excellent. I wish I had this type direction when I was filing.
3. There could be a guide to how to read a judicial decision and what commonly used terms (such as caselaw/ finding/ test) mean.

1. Attachments is noted but not how many, or the number of pages, doing so would ensure the person knows they got the complete intended correspondence.

1. Reflecting on all the letters: they follow a very similar pattern, and the biggest improvements to them all would be adding greetings and conclusions, explaining ALL unfamiliar terms and concepts, and providing hyperlinks to webpages and resources with further information. The one infographic is such a great example of what could be done here – more of this, please!