Question PIP

samfits99

Right a bit of a random one .... I can’t answer it so decided to post on here ..... my friend won his claim in tribunal and got over 8K I’m sure he said, the DWP didn’t even appeal it ..... and that shocks me as you think the DWP would challenge it or appeal it as they can. I hear so many things that 9/10 they don’t appeal it and send anyone, why is that? cause you think they would in every case .... I no it probably varies case to case , just wanted to query it lol 

poppy123456

They very rarely appeal a Tribunal decision because there's nothing to appeal.

samfits99

@poppy123456 thanks for answering that question. my friend got enhanced care and lower rate mobility. they only gave him enhanced on care and nothing for mobility so he taken the gamble to go all whole way to fight for his rights / entitlement. when I seen the 8K I couldn’t believe it !!!! didn’t think they would pay that type of money out @poppy

janer1967

Hi @samfits99 As Poppy said they really dont have anything to appeal about unless there is a error in law. Most of the time the DQP dont even turn up at tribunal to defend their case.

They have to pay any back pay owed and this isnt the largest amount they will have had to pay out

samfits99

@janer1967 what does error in law mean? I was randomly reading forums and some guy on a different site got back pay of 11.5K!!!!!!! I couldn’t believe it. I am surprised they don’t turn up though, would you think they would 

poppy123456

This CPAG link explains it. https://cpag.org.uk/welfare-rights/resources/article/tribunals-and-pip-transfer-errors

I'm not sure why you're surprised that people receive large payments of backdated money, if they are owed it they're entitled to it.

janer1967

Im no expert on what an error in law would be ? I know that if after requesting a statement of reasons from the court either party can appeal if there has been an error in law

They mainly dont turn up as they send their case in writing to the court and the claimant . If they do send a representative they would only be repeating the DWP response. It would also be the resource they would need to end someone to every tribunal

samfits99

@poppy123456 just didn’t think they would like to pay thousands of pounds out that’s all 

mikehughescq

It’s important to remember that DWP have the same appeal rights as claimants. No more and no less. An appeal of a tribunal decision can only be by an error of law not an error of fact. DWP ask for statements of reasons in some cases in order fo further understand the decision. They ask in others because they think the application of the law was wrong. They ask in others because an important legal principle is at stake i.e. it’s a test case. Only the last type tend to go to UT. 

The large amount of arrears payable are not negotiable. They are a legal obligation. They represent arrears owed from the date of claim down to the date of award. A delay of 2 years is not unusual so even award of just standard rate mobility would be nearly £2.5k. An £8,000 payment represents around 2 years arrears of standard rate of both components so it’s a long way from unusual if you pursue the matter to UT.

samfits99

@mikehughescq thanks for that. I have to say mike you seem so clued up. how do you no so much? have you been studying it for yours or have worked for the DWP. as you seem to no your ****. sorry shout the language! also why does most of the time DWP don’t bring anyone to the court ? I thought they would most of the time 

mikehughescq

I can assure you that I have not nor never would work for DWP. 

Also important to say that tribunals are not courts. Many nowadays are held in court rooms, especially since the Tribunal Service was absorbed into HMCTS but tribunals are completely different to courts. 

DWP used to send presenting officers to all appeals. Originally they were often the person who also made the decision but that resulted in a certain amount of abuse and violence against them so then we had POs who were definitely not the original decision maker. 

The problem with that is that a PO who didn’t make the decision can’t give evidence as they’re citing everything second hand. Effectively they’ve less rights than the claimant. POs were meant to be an amicus cureae i.e. a friend to the tribunals. Someone to help them on the law etc. 

However, whilst some were still DMs (but not the DM on the case in question) a lot were not and, if you’re not a decision maker, then you’re unlikely to know the first thing about the law so in practice their purpose became less and less obvious. Many took quite a mental battering at the hands of some of the more blunt tribunal chair or judges. Nobody wants to put themselves through that so they’d turn up less and less and it became a role for the person who wants somewhere to go to do their crossword/read their newspaper or have an early finish on a Friday. 

Under pressure government recruited a new tranche of them but with a different remit. This time they’re not supposed to be a friend of the tribunal. This time they’re there to “defend” DWP decisions. Same issue though. They rarely know the law and increasingly tend to sit there quietly having perhaps spoken at previous appeals and taken a battering. It’s hard to defend something if you aren’t a decision maker; dint know the law etc. 

Claimants get very wound up by the presence of a DWP PO. I tend to find it a little sad nowadays.