Had a client who could not use her right hand so could not peel or chop vegetables as a result we applied for the low rate Care Component of DLA on the basis that she could not plan, prepare and cook a main meal. At the tribunal hearing clients appeal was disallowed on the basis that she could buy packets of frozen veg that did not need chopping? Has the law on the cooking test changed because it seems judges at tribunals are now resorting to the above tactics and mentioning things such as microwaves.

Fri 19-Dec-08 02:11 PM by ken

I think that a tribunal could argue there is sufficient case law that allows for the reasonable use of a microwave to help in in the 'preparation' of a main meal.

However, in terms of ingredients, the commissioner in R(DLA) 2/95 held that -

'The word 'prepare' emphasises a claimant's ability to make all the ingredients ready for cooking. This includes the peeling and chopping of fresh vegetables as opposed to frozen vegetables which require no real preparation.'

Commenting on this, the commissioner in CDLA/5686/1999 said -

'What, the Commissioner was pointing out in R(DLA) 2/95 is that it may be wholly unnecessary for such a main meal to be prepared and so help may not actually be required. That is because relying much of the time on largely pre-cooked meals may well be satisfactory as a means of keeping oneself fed. The ability to re-heat pre-cooked meals is not sufficient to prevent a claimant from satisfying the condition of section 72(1)(a)(ii).

In that sense, I would agree … that the test is not to see whether claimants can cope. However, none of that is relevant to the question whether a tribunal may have regard to unconventional methods of preparing a cooked main meal for one using basic ingredients. In other words, while the test is not a test of whether a claimant can cope with preparing a cooked main meal if the use of pre-cooked convenience foods is taken into account, it is a test of whether a claimant can cope with preparing a cooked main meal for one using basic ingredients. The statutory language is unambiguous.'

How does someone with no use of one hand open a packet of frozen peas? Even with two fully operational hands and a full set of teeth it isn't easy. If you lay it down flat and then use scissors they'll go all over the floor...

Peeling potatoes is the locus classicus for food preparation. Unless you want oven chips, on the whole you need to prepare your own.

Surely the use of frozen food to avoid chopping etc goes against the decision in Moyna that the cooking test was hypothetical,it was described as a 'thought experiment to calibrate the the severity of the disability'' in the House of Lords judgement.If the appellant can't chop or peel veg then surely the test is satisfied no matter what practical steps are used to ensure they actually have a meal to eat.The fact that the appellant has to resort to using pre chopped frozen food to prepare a meal might even be taken as a significant indicator that they are not able to chop and peel (and therefore cook in the 'conventional'way)

If the Tribunal accepted that the claimant had to use pre-chopped food because of their disability, then I would say that is proof itself that they satisfy the main meal test for DLA. This must be the logical conclusion of the previous contributions to this thread. The conclusion of the Tribunal could therefore not have been more incorrect, bearing in mind the apparent facts of the case, and such a huge error should therefore be the basis of the challenge to reverse the decision.