ESA Upper Tribunal Decision

[paulb1310]

From a decision posted today:

 

In conclusion, while there are reasons why the formal descriptors, the ESA50, and the ESA85 all use different terminology this inconsistency does require that a decision maker and a tribunal pay attention to the terms of the statutory test. This requires adequate fact finding. It may not be enough simply to adopt the evidence in either the ESA50 or the ESA85 as determining the statutory test.

Although the decison relates to mental health problems I feel the decision binds Tribunals on all ESA appeal.

[honeybee13]

Hello Paul. I'm having trouble understanding this, hope I'm not unduly thick . Is there any chance you could translate into English for us lesser mortals please?

 

Thank you, HB.

[paulb1310]

Sorry to sort of post and run. Thought it was a decision worth sharing. What the decision is talking about is the fact that the questions in the ESA claim form, the questions on the medical form and the actual regulations are all different and that the decision should be based on the regulations and not just the medical assessment. Actually that doesn't seem much clearer when I read it back

I read it as meaning that Tribunals in particular should not just be blinkered and take into account the medical assessment but take into account the fact that the medical advisor was working to questions that are actually slightly different to the ESA rules and regulations.

If that's no help post again and I'll keep trying

[ANDYANDFLO]

From a decision posted today:

 

 

In conclusion, while there are reasons why the formal descriptors, the ESA50, and the ESA85 all use different terminology this inconsistency does require that a decision maker and a tribunal pay attention to the terms of the statutory test. This requires adequate fact finding. It may not be enough simply to adopt the evidence in either the ESA50 or the ESA85 as determining the statutory test.

 

 

 

Although the decison relates to mental health problems I feel the decision binds Tribunals on all ESA appeal.

 

Hi Paulb 1310,

 

I have just come across this posting of yours. What a great decision! Could you possibly let me know the case name and number please.

I fully understand the reasoning behind it. This decision should help a lot of people whose determination at DWP level was based entirely on the ESA85. i.e. in my case no other evidence was sought even from my GP and the ESA50 was lacking in any sort of detail or explanation when I filled it in.

[COUNTMEIN]

Hi Paulb 1310,

 

I have just come across this posting of yours. What a great decision! Could you possibly let me know the case name and number please.

I fully understand the reasoning behind it. This decision should help a lot of people whose determination at DWP level was based entirely on the ESA85. i.e. in my case no other evidence was sought even from my GP and the ESA50 was lacking in any sort of detail or explanation when I filled it in.

 

I am ther same ... When I filled in the forn I rushed it and found it very confusing as I was due to go into hospital a few days later and wanted to just get it back ASAP...At that time didn't realise how important it was ( BEING A NEWCOMER TO THE BENEFIT SYSTEM AFTER 3O ODD YEARS WORKING ) thought I'd breeze threw the medical having 'sight" problems & having undergone many operations on my eyes recently and I knew there was/are lots more operations to come...and I was on tons of medication and I was going the hospital almost daily for check-ups etc-etc, so I just concentrated and ticked the 'vision section of the form and boxes and sent it back pronto!!...wish I knew then what I know now!!....

[niness]

Hi Paulb 1310,

 

I know this is a bit dated, but like ANDYANDFLO, I have only just come across the posting of yours. What a success I wish I could have the same luck!

I feel as if I'm banging my head against a wall trying to get ESA, (and the first claim of any sort in 30 plus years). I've had a second medical in less than a year, had my benefit stopped for the third time in a year and spent a fortune getting more and more consultants and doctors reports etc. For the first medical I got 18 points after an appeal, (but 12 to start with), but zero this year and still zero after appeal.

I'm at tribunal stage now so do you possibly have case number or a reference that I could maybe use please.

Thanks and regards Nick

[ErikaPNP]

Case number is CE/2373/2009.

 

The judgment is attached.

CE 2373 2009-00.doc

[ANDYANDFLO]

Thanks Erika

[niness]

Thank you much Erika. Fingers crossed that this will help some.

Nick