If this is your first visit, check out the community guide. You will have to Join us or Sign in before you can post.
Grounds for Upper Tribunal Appeal due to error by assessor AND Tribunal?
Weeme56
Member Posts: 36 Courageous
Just got Statement of Reasons in from Tribunal which Hubby lost. Wonder if we would have grounds to appeal to upper teir. GP had given PIP copies of letters from hubbys psych to GP - updates really. One mentioned we had gone to Barceloan for my 60th birthday. Tribunal grilled hubby about him not taking Disabilitty assistance at Airports. It did not dawn on me until recently. that trip was in December 2016, his PIP assessment was December 2017 - a year later. Tribunal Statement mentiions this trip as being recent when expressing issue with him not needing assitance. Why would a trip a year before the PIP assessment matter? He was being assessed on how he was at that time..not the year before! would this be sufficient to appeal to Upper Teir? Aslo they expressed opinion that they believed it improbable that hubby forgets he had blackout. Hubby told Tribunal he had not had one since last year..he forgot he had one a few months before the Tribunal - he often does not realise it happened. They tend to happen if he needs to ge t up for the loo during the night. We no longer tell the GP. No cause was found & he has not had any tests for over 10 yrs! I usually help him get back to bed he shakes & stammers & 'fits' for about 30 mins then falls asleep. Next day I ask how are you now..he ask why? The entire report as good as said LIARS Tjey ignores GP & Hopsital recent report but refered to letters from 2015? Is that acceptable?
This discussion has been closed.
Replies
Get some advice from the CAB and ask them to handle the new appeal ! Make copies of everything and keep them for future reference.
The DWP are trying to save money that clearly should be paid to the sick and disabled and all assessments seem to be biased in their favour , don`t let them win - appeal !
There's me harping on about the shortage of any rep when the one you find turns out like that.
My wife had two when she made her first Attendance Allowance application. I had to go in her place to the Tribunal as she was far too ill in bed. The reps did nothing, advised nothing except sit next to me. I even had to tell the judge that I completed the claim form as it was a shambles so as to avoid the agency the reps came from being slated.The reps helped complete the claim form.
Not only did she not get the award I took the brunt of the judges wrath for the form as well as being personally described as being a non credible witness and drug dealer.
My experience of reps for DWP purposes is almost zero although it was just the one experience - never had one after that.
I can just imagine the opening line from the poster to the rep
'hey, do you know what you are about? You made a right pigs ear in that hearing. What have you got to say for yourself eh?'
People are often surprised when that incompetent supposedly disinterested first view appears to be echoed by a second adviser from elsewhere. It’s not common but there is a proportion of people who travel from service to service looking for someone to give them the answer they want.
Going from service to service looking for someone to give them the answer they want.is not the way forward. But having choices is.
In my one case, I did telephone the agency afterwards but no one ever returned my call. Consequently without having had the ability to ask why the hearing went that way I had no alternative but to strike them off my extremely small list of advisors and making a point of telling others also looking for help of what had happened. Eventually the list became smaller and smaller for many other reasons leaving me with a ZERO option.
Nowt defensive going on here. It's not really me who has to explain their approach.
You absolutely have the right to critique and question but you haven't. Instead you've gone first to an online forum!
How would you feel if someone had some issues with the way you had conducted yourself doing your line of work and their first resort was not to talk to you about it but to raise it first with a group of strangers who, in most instances, understandably don't have a grasp on the role, the law, caselaw, guidance etc? If I found a client on a forum preferring the expertise of lay people over me, and where I would not have the right of reply, then depending on the circumstances, that would likely be the end of the working relationship.
Some people on here will not be able to access advice, representation or both. When you apparently have access to both then, if you don't understand or agree with what has taken place, you start with your rep. You have an expectation of them being professional, fair and open. Is there some reason your conduct should be different?
It's really that simple.
Good night everyone.