Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
Warning of a lesser award prior to a PIP tribunal hearing
Hi,
We have a client who was awarded 4 points for D/L and 0 points for mobility on her PIP renewal in Febraury. We asked for a reconsideration on the decision and subsequently the claimant was awarded 8 points for daily living and mobility remained unchanged.
We were more confident of the mobility component being awarded rather than the daily living and therefore would like to take this to appeal. We understand that the Tribunal can look at the whole award and we’re slightly concerned about the client losing points for D/L.
Does anyone know if the Judge has to warn the client prior to the hearing if they feel that going ahead will jeopardise the award of D/L?
Any comments on this are much appreciated!
Thanks
Kate
Hi Kate
[2015] UKUT 275 (AAC) advises that while there is no protected right to points awarded by the decision maker, the FIrst-tier Tribunal should nevertheless advise the appellant if it has misgivings about the points in order that he or she has the opportunity to make his or her case in the knowledge of the arguments to the contrary.
But of course that doesn’t necessarily mean prior to the hearing - I guess it may only come out in the hearing. Having said that I have had DLA appeals in the past where the judge has pre-warned me and the client but I don’t think they are obliged to.
Re-evaluating points that don’t give an award requires some notice to the claimant, but to reduce an actual component would certainly require a warning and opportunity to withdraw.
Thank you that’s really helpful!
I don’t think they are obliged to.
I think they are.
Admittedly a good few years back I did a DLA appeal with a rather conservative Tribunal. On the papers the mobility award looked rock solid and no warning was given by the Tribunal (that of itself was evidence of how steady the mob looked in medical evidence) but during the hearing that fell apart.
The traditional poorly fitting wheelchair that they’d borrowed for the hearing was a dead give away but I evidently managed to keep my poker face on.
Due to the absence of warning; and after some footwork on my part, we walked with the mobility award intact.
Hi Kate
[2015] UKUT 275 (AAC) advises that while there is no protected right to points awarded by the decision maker, the FIrst-tier Tribunal should nevertheless advise the appellant if it has misgivings about the points in order that he or she has the opportunity to make his or her case in the knowledge of the arguments to the contrary.
But of course that doesn’t necessarily mean prior to the hearing - I guess it may only come out in the hearing. Having said that I have had DLA appeals in the past where the judge has pre-warned me and the client but I don’t think they are obliged to.
I put something in the written submission to say that as neither the appellant or respondent have raised any issues with the award the tribunal would be justified in confirming it,but if they did want to consider it they should warn the appellant and consider an adjournment to enable a case to be prepared or for the appellant to consider their position about the appeal as whole.
With this in the submission our local judges almost always deal with the issue at the beginning of the hearing, either saying that they are not considering the un- appealed component or that they are going to look at it. This helps to clarify matters and has, I daresay, stopped some appellants losing what they already had.
Interestingly I’ve had a mere 2 cases in the past year where a warning was given and I do have a sense it’s not such a thing as it was. I was fairly astonished in both cases as I’d been involved from day one in both. Persuaded appellant to proceed in both. Won both with comfort. Actually got a telling off on the second one for going ahead and, inevitably, no apology for the fact that they were so wrong the appellants PIP award exceeded their DLA. Made all the more galling by the fact I had watched the medical “professional” walk in minus papers and the clerk had had to provide their copies for the morning because said person had the paperwork but had just come back from a cruise and hadn’t had time to go home!