Dla appeal on tues 26 june - help?

[fran1phil]

My son disabilities etc - I am concerned about things in relation to the 'appeal papers' prepared submitted to the FtT; iin their extent and possible impliication's? plus a few errors (dates).

 

Section 2 - Schedule of Evidence:-

 

doc nos:

1 - 3 original appeal letter 19/03/2007

4-57 new claim for dla 05/09/2006

58-61 medical report gp 03/10/2006

62-63 new claim decision 22/11/2006

64-69 request to look again 13/12/2006

70-75 advice medical services 16/01/2007

76-79 record of reconsideration 24/01/2007

80-84 evidence from represent 08/08/2007

85 notice of appeal decision 06/08/2007

86-93 request leave to appeal 15/10/2007 to commissioners

94 decision of tribunal 03/01/2008

95 computer record of issue 17/04/2011 of renewal claim pack.

96 record of telephone call 12/10/2011

97-134 new claim for dla 01/11/2011

135-141 med report psychiatrist 14/12/2011

142-147 " " GP 23/12/2011

148-150 computer decision 09/01/2012

151-154 notification of decision 09/01/2012

155 Appeal Letter 08/02/2012

156 record of reconsideration 20/03/2012 (informal)

 

Section 3 - The Decision (now this is a little confusing?)

 

It states he is not entitled to either the mobility component or the care component from 01/11/2012 - does not satisfy conditions etc. ok?

 

The last paragraph states: The Tribunal may wish to note that prior to this new claim Mr X had an award of DLA as given by a Tribunal on 03/01/2008. The award of LRM AND MRC expired 04/09/2011. As the renewal claim was not received prior to 04/09/2011 the subsequent claim pack was treated as a new claim. In order to give a full back ground to the case, the papers relating to the previous claim (as submitted to the Tribunal of 04/09/11), have been included in date order.

 

Section 2 - this seems to be pretty much EVERYTHING on file regarding a previous claim ?

 

Section 3 - seems to contradict itself in stating 'As the renewal claim ......prior to 04/09/2011 .......treated as a new claim. Then goes on to state "in order to give a full back ground to the case .,......... well which is it ??????? also "as submitted to the Tribunal of 04/09/2011 ?" WHAT TRIBUNAL ON 04/09/2011?". This doesnt make sense. Also it could make any decisionss of the Tribunal bias toward the applicant, in delving into all his previous information. Plus most of which irrelevant now as he was a child then and adult now. (age 22 ).

 

The facts of the case are even more confusing and misleading, as they are listed in order from 2006 (really not relevant to now!) 5.1 - 5.20 !

 

How can he best approach this matter ?

 

thanks

???????

[fran1phil]

My son goes before the tribunal this tuesday 26 june, re dla appeal.

 

(sorry this did not seem very clear reading original post above)

[EmmaCook]

I'm looking at this and am concerned you didn't have a reply. It's today. Do you still require so help? Might be a tad late now! Let me know ASAP.

[fran1phil]

Hi there - thanks for offering to advise, but yes the date now far exceeded. However, there have been further developments which I require some advice/assistance with.

On the 25 June, my son called HM Courts & Tribunal Service to confirm his timeslot for Appeal Hearing the following day. He was told, that the appeal had been adjourned and he had been written to regarding this. The next day he got a letter from them, bascially saying "A tribunal heard your appeal on 22/06/2012 at Sutton. I enclose decision notice..."

The decision notice states:

1. The appeal is adjourned to Sutton ........

2. Directions to parties: the clerk shall obtain from the appellant's GP ...... and consultants covering the period from January

2010 to date.

A report be obtained from the appellants housing support officer ........... concerning his accommnodation position.

then enclosed is a Authorisation to obtain furthert medical evidence form.

 

So I was right, in the whole appeal being based on a load of now 'irrelevant' and 'dated' evidence. So basically the DWP (DM) had compiled an Appeal Bundle of some 140 pages which all dated back to 2006/7 relating to a previous claim???

So this really means that my sons application for DLA - which has been running for about 9 months now - was made up of an invalid decision, later revised and not changed sent to appeal and heard on a random date for some unknown reason and now my son has to go through the motions once again and further delays ............. surely they cant simply brush an error as blatant as this under the carpet - as if it never happened? ......... can they??? Please advise, I would really like to get your opiinion on this matter. I had previously been concerned at them having no regard toward the DWP DR Policy (data retention); but was told by another member that they can use whatever evidence information they choose, of any age???

HELP !!! PLEASE . Many thanks hope someone can see the flaws in all of this and suggest how I may be able to use it to my (my sons advantage somehow?).

 

Thanks

S

[Nystagmite]

I was once told they could use any evidence they want. In my case, they chose to use a 2 year old report and ignored the newer report.

 

The bundle you've received is everything the DWP have relating to your son's case.

[hensteeth]

I was once told they could use any evidence they want. In my case, they chose to use a 2 year old report and ignored the newer report.

 

The bundle you've received is everything the DWP have relating to your son's case.

 

The DWP, like any government department can and do use ANY evidence that could help in reaching the correct decision. Historical facts can and do have a bearing on current claims. A decision is reached using the best evidence that is available. Remember the DWP are not there to be helpful and use only the evidence that best suits the claimant's claim. They are not your friend either.

 

A benefit claim is no different than any other 'allegation'

 

The claimant claims and provides evidence in support of that claim/allegation. The DWP's job is to refute or accept that claim.

[Nystagmite]

Historical facts can and do have a bearing on current claims. A decision is reached using the best evidence that is available.

 

That's rubbish. I had a report from my consultant dated 21/6/07 which stated "Miss XXXX's corrected vision is 6/10 and 6/12". I then had a letter dated sometime in 2009 which stated "Miss XXXX's corrected vision is 6/24 and 6/36. She is registered as partially sighted".

 

Using old evidence which is now irrelevant is hardly using the best evidence.

[RaeUK]

... surely they cant simply brush an error as blatant as this under the carpet - as if it never happened? ......... can they??? ...

 

That's not how I read it. In fact I read it as being a case of congratulations are in order. So, congratulations. That's a pretty good result. Far from brushing anything under the carpet or messing anyone about, the Tribunal have done their job. And a very good job at that. Cases are usually checked before the Hearing and, in this case, it's just as well. The Tribunal noted that the DWP only had outdated info to contribute. They quite rightly then determined this wasn't good enough and, in order for the Tribunal to be effective, they needed more information. So it was adjourned - albeit a little late in the day. Your son will have a far better Tribunal hearing and you all get a little extra time to prepare for it. If you have a good GP, make an appointment to discuss the case and ensure all the right information is passed to the Tribunal. I see this as good news ...