REPRESENTATION AND ROLES
You can be
a representative - you don’t talk for the appellant because they’re
there but you do get to outline what award you’re looking for and what
the legal case is as well as pick up on any issues the tribunal or
appellant miss or misinterpret.
- observer - sits away from the tribunal but you are watching only. You do not and cannot take part.
witness - you give your own evidence to support the appellants own
case. You don’t get to comment on anything else. You watch silently, do
your bit and you’re done.
- appellant - the person making the
claim being appealed. The only person allowed to present their evidence
and answer questions on it unless they have an appointee.
family members struggle to be observers as it’s hard to be silent. They
struggle to represent as they don’t know enough of the law, case law or
guidance and confuse the role with speaking for the appellant and get
shot down in flames to the detriment of the case. They often make poor
witnesses as they haven’t been prepared by a rep and want to rehear the
whole case instead of focusing on what they know.
The temptation to talk for any appellant needs to be resisted. You’ll always get people saying “but...
- they’re not articulate.
- they’re nervous.
many other arguments. Bottom line - nothing makes the case for the
consequences of someone’s ill health better than a poorly appellant.
other side of having representative is that, as you’ll read on here,
people get incredibly stressed with the process; what comes when; what
letters mean; what is good evidence; what will happen on the day. A good
rep explains all and covers all the bases. It’s typical that people
think representation is just about what happens on the day and the
outcome. That’s about 10% of what gets done. A good rep should also keep
you off web forums (seriously). All your questions should be answered
by them. If people come on here because they need answers and they have a
rep. that is concerning.
Now, having said that, tribunals are
inquisitorial so it’s perfectly possible to win a case without a rep
just as it’s equally possible to lose a case with a rep. However, a
badly presented case can win with a decent tribunal but won’t with a
poor one People who have won without representation tend to almost
always ascribe this to something they did rather than the skill of the
tribunal pulling out what was relevant. Having seen tribunals over three
decades, including many times as an observer, it’s almost never the
case. I’ve never yet heard of anyone unrepresented winning two tribunals
Finally, don’t confuse an organisation with a
good reputation as meaning all their reps will be good. Good
organisations have bad reps. Reputationally poor organisation have good
reps. How can you tell? Walk away from anyone who wants to tell you
their success rate? It’s a fave tactic of organisations that charge but
also of inexperienced or renegade/boastful reps. That tells you that
they’re either lying or cherry picking only cases which are clear cut
winners and probably would be anyway with a decent tribunal and without
them. Good reps do not guarantee a win but they will take in winnable
cases rather than likely winners and they’re the more likely to turn a
marginal case into a winner. They’ll also know their law, case law and
guidance and be able to cite it but in plain English.
1 - Concentrate wholly on what you were like on the date of claim.
2 - There are no “trick” questions. Tribunals are usually listed 20
to 40 minutes apart so, apart from the appeal papers, they need
questions which cut across lots of functions. So the car question is
brilliant because it indicates grip; mobility; dexterity; the ability to
do something repeatedly; concentration and stamina. Instead of thinking
negatively about such stuff think about what they’re getting at and
your answers will be much better and more detailed. Similar questions
include whether you’ve been on holiday recently. It feeds into mobility
(getting across an airport); stamina; the ability to cope alone; the
need for aids and appliances.
3 - There are no set rules or order for a hearing beyind the requirement that it must be seen to be fair.
4 - Watch the judge’s pen. All 3 members may take notes but only the
judge writes a record of proceedings. If you don’t want them to miss
anything then remember that they can’t write as fast as you can speak,
so watch their pen and slow down. Don’t worry about going too slow. They
will tell you if you do.
5 - Never interrupt any tribunal member. It is perfectly okay to
challenge them provided it’s not rude or aggressive. However, think
about whether what you’re challenging them on is directly related to
points. If it’s not then better to focus on points. This is especially
important because loads of people second guess the demeanour of tribunal
members as determining whether they are pro or against and it’s largely
nonsense. An aggressive, challenging member may well just be a poor
communicator and wholly on your side right up to the point you challenge
6 - Get yourself a representative and travel to the venue by whatever
means makes you feel comfortable. It’s only ever an issue if you don’t
explain what you did in full and if doing so contradicts your other
evidence in some way for daily living and /or mobility.
7 - Same goes for clothes. You need to wear whatever makes you feel
comfortable and relaxed. If you’re not relaxed then the likelihood of
you presenting well are much reduced. Dressing down is not a good idea
unless that all you can afford. A person who feels naked without make-up
or a suit and tie will similarly be over stressed if they try to
pretend they’re in their comfort zone dressing down.
8 - Other people’s tribunal experience can be valuable but it’s just
that. Their experience. If they lost then it’s the tribunal to blame. If
they win they everything they did is why they won and what you must do.
The truth is usually very much in between.
9 - Know your case. What points are you going for and why. What’s
your evidence? “The HCP was a liar” is neither evidence nor a winning
strategy. Also, know the appeal papers. What’s where.
10 - Do not be tempted to claim you’ve worsened since the date of
claim. That’s a recipe for a failed appeal and an invitation to make
another claim. Even if you have got worse always concentrate on your
date of claim and what you were like then.
I'm looking for advice I applied for pip had assessment got copy of my assessment report witch what she says I am so upset i told my cpn nurse at mental health serves as the assessor at actos scored me 4 points I'm under mental health service on and off for good 8 years it's looking like I'm going to have to appeal it's making my ainexty and depression really bad everyday qith worry I also sent supported letters
A signed testamonial will do no harm
Try & be kind to one another even if we may have different views.
Scope community team
Hello! I won my tribunal on the 7th June, I know I have to wait 28 days as the dwp can appeal. I heard it goes through debt management before you receive back dated money, is this right? What is the debt management?
@Pipquestions2 The debt is that dwp debt like social loans etc?