If this is your first visit, check out the community guide. You will have to Join us or Sign in before you can post.
Concerned about another member's safety or wellbeing? Find out how to let us know.
error of law
Hi, my daughter has just received her statement of reasons from her PIP Tribunal. It was very upsetting reading what the judge had to say, according to the judge my daughter exaggerates and lacks creditability. There has been assumptions made in the statement, i.e- due to my daughters illness/disability i would often drive her to university, this helped with the fatigue and pain control, the judge has stated that the tribunal found that this was dictated by choice and/or need for me to be able to use the car as i car share with my daughter. This is not the case at all and none of this was said to the tribunal, we have our own cars we do not share. They stated they could only consider the circumstances obtaining as at the date of the decision appealed against (17/04/2019) and not how she was at the time of the tribunal hearing, the hearing was June 2020, if that is the case then should they have took into consideration the fact that we took my daughter on holiday in November 2019 and also should they have considered the new job she started in December 2019?. They are refusing her PIP because there saying she must be very intellectual because she attended university and is able to work part time. We are going to see about appealing to the upper tribunal, but im unsure if there is any error of Law, any advice would be greatly appreciated