nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

We want to hear from you: please tell us about your experience of the online community.

Pip appeal dwp destroyed dla data requested by tribunal

tru88le

Appeal Adjournment because the tribunal wanted the last dla award information but the dwp have responded that they destroyed it and all associated papers.
Curious if that is going to go against me. All I have is the indefinite award of dlq letter for 2013 and a proof of claiming dla letter with award info from 2017.
Award for higher rate for both components of dla was renewed indefinitely in 2018, 8 weeks before pip transfer reduced it to standard.
missed the 14 month limit the dwp keep dla files by 6 months so they were binned even though my pip qppeal was ongoing.
They maybe were supposed to keep something as it was same medical info used for a current pip claim.
Anyone kniw znything about such things?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

mark1983

my wife had her tribunal other day an only lasted 10mins 4 on the panel 1 which was dwp who asked the judge for it to be adjoured he wanted 5 years of medical evidence from gp and the 1 of the medical asked dwp same qwestion can we have accsess to the dla report as well and dwp said no its been destroyed

calcotti

mark1983 said:

my wife had her tribunal other day an only lasted 10mins 4 on the panel 1 which was dwp who asked the judge for it to be adjoured he wanted 5 years of medical evidence from gp and the 1 of the medical asked dwp same qwestion can we have accsess to the dla report as well and dwp said no its been destroyed

The DWP person was a 'presenting officer' for the DWP. They are not part pf the tribunal panel.

tru88le

Obviously I am "fussed" as is @mark1983 which is why I asked the question.
The thing @mikehughes, is the tribunal requested it as did the upper tribunal before them and the question was simply where does that leave me. Which was answered to some extent eventually.
I believe the reason is as you say and the purpose being to the panel was that the dla evidence was not outdated at the time of the claim over two years ago.
I agree that it indicates I have not made my case well enough in the first place and that is rather obvious.
Does anyone know while the data has been destroyed and it "being in the interests of justice" according to the tribunal that they see it what will hapoen now.
In other words i'm none the wiser about what will be likely to happen next at the next hearing now that this data is destroyed?
What will the tribunal do about my appeal being denied what they want to see?
Is there anything, such as provide medical notes from the period.
I have good evidence from GP and cardiac nurses but it is too recent but it does confirm that my condition existed then and now and has deteriorated somewhat which I hoped would be considered as some sort of factual proof of my condition when pip started.
What can i provide that is missing, qif they only explained what is lacking i could either provide it or not but its all 'something' is missing that prevents them from deciding but not specifically what it is.
As time goes on the difficulty in giving them whatever it is they need is increased..
As was requested of @mark1983, would sending a stack of medical notes help my appeal?

tru88le

I might add that there was no request about using or not using any dla evidence.

If up to date medical evidence was more desirable i have provided them with really solid evidence bang up to date from three highly qualified experts, a GP, a cardiac nurse and an advanced nuurse oractitioner who have all wrote letters supporting my apoeal with doecific references to pip activities etc.
So the tribunal are fixed on having something from up to 2018 and up to date medical proof isnt what they seem to want they want proof from 2018 which is thin on tbe ground in qll honesty as there was not much activity going on at that point beyond regular medication and gp reviews.
They seem at least now to accept I have a condition.
The fact that the dla was renewed indefinitely just 8 weeks before pip transfer seems to interest them.
Why would they ask for it if it gets destroyed after 18 months.
Why does it not go zgainst dwp if they fail to produce evidence as it would if i failed to produce what was requested.
Is there no conditions where dla related evidence must be kept such as when it was not included in the bundle in the first place? Why are dwp omitting evidence from the tribunal bundle that is later deemed relevant enough to warrant requesting specifically.
Why is the dwp able to not comply with an upper tribunal judges directions without penalty or reason...
Will they at any point alliw the appeal on the grounds that I have surely provided a positive amount of evidence that outweighs that against me of which there is none, how much is needed to tip tne scale in my favour, what can I give them?
What is the likely outcome of the next hearing?

tru88le

I wonder if @mikehughes would represent me for a large cash payment

I also wonder if he believes he could win this appeal or wouod consider it unwinnable.

tru88le

I forgot to add that in an overlap case if an award is reduced there should be some explanation why it was reduced.

tru88le

As i said I didnt get asked wether to take the dla evidence into account.
Can you explain what "reserved the matter to themselves" means?
Thanks

tru88le

Sorry if im repeating myself but theree an enormous lag between my replies and appearing in public after rigorous scrutiny, i assume you meant latter there not matter.
The panel will be new but I expect will be in the exact same situation, any case law I have seen suggests they should look at the dla evidence if there is not enough already to decide. Which takes me back to thefirst question, if dla evidence is destroyed what then happens, the oanel have requested it inthe interests of justice which indicates without it justice cannot be served correctly.
I can send them all my medical notes that would have been used to decide my dla if it would be useful..
Its all the dwp would supply anyway i believe.
Either way this must be one of those limited occasions where dla evidence is relevant...

mark1983

is it common to have the same panel if it gets adjoured or depends on the case with my wife case the judge said sorry we couldn't get it sorted but hopefully when they get 5 years medical evidence from gp the nxt time u see us will maybe be in person depending on the restictions or face to face over phone/laptop sorry just a random qwestion

calcotti

mark1983 said:

is it common to have the same panel if it gets adjoured

Very unusual for the reasons Mike has explained - difficult to co-ordinate diaries of three panel members.

tru88le

I did say in reply to your first post that the panel will be new including someone who was there overseeing.

@Username_removed you didnt need to reiterate what I'd zgreed with somewhat but thanks for clarifying.

Its my view that the newer evidence I supplied prompted the request for dla evidence.
So, okay it has not been practiced for a couple of years to ask for dla evidence but it has been recently seen that when a dla trznsfer case overlaps with pip and the new award is lower then there should be an explanation. Maybe why thst is why the panel also requested an an appraisal from the dwp in person off how the decision for dla was reached.
So that was two requests.
Also it can now be said that the absence of the practice of requesting dla evidence not seen for at least two years can now be said to have been seen in the wild again in the last month.

Also while the new panel might not care about old evidence they will be faced with dealibg with it anyway due to the reasons for the prior adjournment. So they can choose to ignore it but they can't deny the reason for the hearing will be to hear and see the requested evidence.
I dont believe they will ignore after a higher tribunal judge requested it and then the panel judge who may have only made the request becsuse of the upper judges direction to produce it.
So its a direction from an upper tribunal judge which I will make sure is not brushed aside.

calcotti

tru88le said: @Username_removed you didnt need to reiterate what I'd zgreed with somewhat but thanks for clarifying.

I rather think Mike was responding to this

mark1983 said:

is it common to have the same panel if it gets adjoured ..

tru88le

Username_removed said:

I think I’m out on this thread too. The OP wilfully misinterprets posts and it’s agonising to watch and read.

At no point have I said, for example, that it’s no longer the practice to request DLA evidence. I simply said that the case law has moved on and it’s no longer a given that a tribunal will accept the need for it. It also certainly isn’t accepted that there’s a need for it just because a new award is lower either. This simplistic view of everything isn’t how the law works and it never has been.

I’m not interested in whether @tru88le believes the FTT have no choice but to do as a UT says or believes they can “make sure” it’s not brushed aside. My professional experience tells me that 50% or more of UT guidance on the next hearing is disregarded and often rightfully so. That same experience tells me that the number of times a tribunal adjourned for evidence adjourns a second time with a different panel for the same thing is well below 50%.

Finally I would delight in being a fly on the wall when the OP gets into making sure the tribunal go on a search for DLA evidence which no longer exists; for which a case hadn’t been made as to relevance. It’s something you get away with once but after that… well I can script the lecture. It’s the one that explains that this tribunal is neither the UT nor the last FTT. It is a fresh hearing and the appellant is starting from ground zero. It’s the one which explains that a tribunal don’t welcome being told which evidence they must take into account and so on… good luck.

I look forward to the next post telling me just how wrong I was. I have no doubt it’s coming.

I thought you said earlier that the dla evidence would not have in fact been destroyed.