New Green Paper Discussion - now includes accessible formats and consultation event sign up links!

Here is another relevation to all:

Why do you need a Tribunal:-

I Tribunal is a "last resort" where information sent in by a Claimant for benefits has been looked at, and a Decision Maker for the DWP has made a decision on the availability of a benefit based on what you have sent in.

a) If the Decision Maker decides s/he can make a decision based on that, you will receive that decision.

b) On receiving that decision, the claimant will look at that report and decide whether the report is correct based on the evidence that they (DWP) have.

c) There are now two points raised here, i) Except its content, and send confirmation (via E mail, as electronic) or send a hard copy of your signature in the response forms, that you have excepted its content and no further action is needed.

ii) You do not except its content, and you go through the report, highlighting the "errors" or omissions within that report,

ii. a) You also add what you believe has been omitted with hard copies, (or within the response e-mail) by way of support letters from other parties, on headed paper from people that treat you, (these are files contained within your medical history.) or any medical evidence that has changed either since the form has been submitted, or that you feel should have been included and was not looked at, ( this could be by way of a cyclical event in your treatment, an operation pending, or an operation that has taken place where the results have either been collated with a view of re-visiting the prescribed medication in line with the results or expected results, which, due to the type of operation, a "quick fix" is not the entended result, but on paper would go some way in improving the daily life of the claimant. Cancer being one such operation.

d) That when the report was originally commissioned by the DWP that all evidence would be included and sent to the decision maker, where he would base the initial report based on his experience. This again raises issues as far as the claimant is concernedsince,

a) The claimant may not understand the form sent and would rely on the decision maker to help fill out the form and send in appropiate information, which can be via support letters or medical history.

a. i) The claimant some times when answering such a request, will vet his/her information sent as irrelevant, or not needed, yet when looking at the bigger picture of the claim becomes relevant for the decision maker to understand and make an unbias report about the claimant.

An example is having to get up more than twice to go to the toilet?

Left off the form: How you struggle to get in and out of bed, whether the toilet is up stairs or down stairs, whether because you cannot climb stairs your bedroom is on the ground floor of a 2 story house or 3 story masonette, that struggling to climb stairs, that the property offered is on the third floor where access and regress to the building is required every time you go out, and subsequently this isolates you as you won't go out to compensate.

e) Further information is submitted, where a decision maker will look at the information and then decide whether it warrents a change under the change of circumstances, or that the information supplied is beyond his normal expertise as they are not medically qualified, and would require further support from people that they hire to give a report on the medical information and history supplied, as the "gargon" used by Doctors or the expected results can only be decifered by a Medically trained professional, this would also take into account the medication previously taken and why there was a need to increase or decrease the dosage at that time, or the future, to coinside with the results that the Doctor of medically trained person would be expecting.

This is the basis of every claim:-

Since the System of assessment is being questioned not only by me and SCOPE, but every person that claims a benefit under the "new" Reform Rules and the way that the government suports the benefit system by making cuts based on costings and not the "individual" needs of the claimant. Then I need to question "What am I paying National Insurance" for?

Who supports the claimant when an issue arrises? Since the cause of the problem is the very people that administer the claim from start to finish?

Why do we need a further assessment for benefits when the need for an assessment is to get "medical assistance"

This is incomplete but after a week of how the system works and the recent Judicial review in a tribunal on Wednesday 23rd April. it is time to stop peoples perception of what I ask for and give me the requested information in a PDF format so I can enforce that document with the continual errors made as they say its a legal document used to base all claims on.