Upper Tribunal success - referred to new First Tier Tribunal - waiting time?

louangel311

Hi

Wonder if anybody could answer my question please?
I applied for PIP on 2 January 2018, was refused, Mandatory Reconsideration refused, went to FtT on 2 May 2019 and they refused my appeal.
I applied for the Statement of Reasons, found numerous errors in law (I'm blessed that I was a Solicitor before I became ill), got leave to appeal to the UT and got their decision today - they upheld my appeal and have referred my case to a newly constituted FtT.
Does anybody have any idea how long this could take please? I've been advised it may be by Skype or video call due to Covid 19 and just wondered if my case would take precedence as it's been going on for so long?
Many thanks, Louise 

mikehughescq

UT relistings are usually really quick i.e. within 3 months. However, the current process is review by a salaried judge to see if the case can be awarded on the papers and then a telephone hearing if it cannot. The bigger issue at present is the lack of clerks to do the admin to make this happen. Anybody’s guess really. 

louangel311

Thanks Mike for your reply, really appreciated.
Louise 

mikehughescq

Sorry, should have added that HMCTS will not review the papers properly before resisting UT cases so the same mistakes reoccur around availability i.e. they won’t look back at your SSCS1 to check your availability so now is the moment to be proactive and contact them with an update on what you can and can’t do availability wise.

tru88le

mikehughescq said:

UT relistings are usually really quick i.e. within 3 months. However, the current process is review by a salaried judge to see if the case can be awarded on the papers and then a telephone hearing if it cannot. The bigger issue at present is the lack of clerks to do the admin to make this happen. Anybody’s guess really. 

By 'decided on the papers' do you mean an appeal could be potentially won without another 1tT?
After an adjournment and a failed rehearing I have no sense of moving  forward  or of optimism  in getting another hearing at all.
Why would a third hearing be any different?

mikehughescq

Yes, that’s exactly what I mean. The intent is to award on the papers when they can and, if they feel unable to do that, only then will it currently proceed to a telephone hearing. 

Every hearing and every panel is different and sometimes that can be the difference between losing and winning but usually that difference is achieved by a ruthless and critical assessment of the evidence in your case and a different presentation. Essentially it’s the age old story of, if you do the same thing why would you expect a different outcome?