Statement of reasons

Teresa_1

At last l have statement of reasons sent to me re refusal of PIP.They state that l travel 8,000 miles per annum in my car which is not true,and can be checked via Motability l presume.I had my car nearly 5 years,and have done less than 9,000 miles! Due to this,they say l can cover a considerable distance on an annual basis.Can this be considered an error of judgement please?

tomm

Yes, IMO because it's an error of FACT, can you prove what miles you cover? the evidence is key, as this could well be a case of a simple mistake made at the garage who carries out the annual service checks, where someone has input the incorrect odometer reading, which should be fairly easy to show, if that is the case

Teresa_1

I'm sure motability will know for sure.I had the car from new with them.Sadly,what they've put has been used against me

Teresa_1

Sorry,but was does IMO mean?

Nystagmite

IMO = in my opinion

What does the distance you supposedly travel have to do with your PIP refusal?

Teresa_1

Because l'm agoraphobic,so don't travel far,very complicated to try and explain.

Nystagmite

Ah, I see. They're using that as evidence you can't be agoraphobic and therefore, are able to get out and about.

Teresa_1

Yes,basically.Saying l travel approx 8,000 miles per annum,therefore covering a substantial distance on an annual basis.

CockneyRebel

If you are hoping to appeal to the UTT then you really need to get trained advice as to whether this is an error in law

CR

Teresa_1

Thank you,yes,l'm aware,but very unsure about how to go about it.That was the advice given to me from my MP.I need to find a way of doing this privately.

mikehughescq

You cannot appeal to the UT on an error of fact. You need to identify one of the 5 errors of law. However, in this case you theoretically have a tribunal which made a finding of fact for which there is no evidence. The question is whether there is really no evidence. If you took out the one silly mistake would there still be evidence upon which they could have drawn the same conclusion? If there could then there's no error of law.

Either way, starting point is to requests a statement of reasons and record of proceedings within one month of the tribunal decision and then secure yourself representation in order to identify potential errors of law as well as assess your entitlement if you win. No point in showing an error of law; getting the matter referred back for a fresh hearing only to discover that you weren't ever going to be entitled anyway.

Nystagmite

I personally wouldn't use the amount of mile as my argument. If you're appealing mobility on the basis of planning and following a journey, there's no mention of using a car. It's to do with getting from A to B safely without help.

mikehughescq

Agreed but it could be the main way to argue the decision was erroneous in law. Taking into account an irrelevant consideration is also an error of law.