Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
DWP say she meets descriptor but don’t award points for it
Not sure what to do about this.
Reading papers to do lateish tribunal sub and notice that both decision letter and MR notice say:
“I have decided you cannot follow the route of an unfamiliar journey without another person” (i.e. she meets descriptor 1 D of Moving Around, scores 10 points and gets SRM). But, instead they have awarded 4 points for descriptor 1 B, prompting magically overcomes distress and she can make journey, blah.
HCP report did recommend descriptor B but psychiatrist report that client provided at time states she is unable to get out without being accompanied, has extreme panic attacks and only leaves house to attend medical appointments.
SSCS1 points out that she should have been awarded SRM on basis of what decision notice/MR say. DWP sub to tribunal merely states that she has pointed this out but makes no other comment. Any thoughts on what is going on here? Obviously could just be a typo in decision notice that is then cut and pasted into MR but why would appeals team not bother to argue this when their attention drawn to it? The DWP sub also describes the telephone call when she asked for MR as a “successful reconsideration request”. How it can it be successful if no award made? Successfully asked for an MR??
I’m leaning towards not contacting DWP about this prior to hearing, just bringing it up in my sub, hoping no PO present to explain and seeing what judge makes of it. Any thoughts? I’m going to argue for 1 F & 12 points anyway but hope that this is handy fallback position.
[ Edited: 19 Feb 2015 at 05:34 pm by BC Welfare Rights ]I’d do exactly that Billy. I’ve had the same happen on an ESA WCA decision. As with your case, the DWP just blanked it. Tribunal upheld client’s appeal.
I make no secret of how alarming it is that a DWP submission author does not necessarily respond to the points raised by the appellant or appellant’s representative. Even in cases where the argument is straight forward and refers to specific regulations, DWP is either uninterested in responding or deliberately decides not to, suggesting that either 1) the composer of the DWP submission agrees but can’t/won’t change it; or 2) he hasn’t read it.
It can work in one’s favour, especially in the absence of a Presenting Officer - sometimes that’s for the best as it’s horrible to be embarassed in front of other people. That said, it is not how appeals ought to work. Too often half the time is spent trying to work out what has happened and why, which is a waste of everyone’s time.
Good luck with this appeal, do report back with what happens.
Good luck with this appeal, do report back with what happens.
The PO turned up and said that it was an unfortunate typo. We won the appeal on 11F anyway so ERM and no resolution of the above. DWP has asked for SOR. It has told my client that it won’t pay the ERDL that it conceded at the hearing in the meantime . Perhaps it wants to appeal what its own PO conceded…
Unspeakable curses upon them