MH/RJ review questions in the context of 2 cases

Hello all,

Wondering if anyone could give me a view on two questions re. the MH/RJ reviews. 

Situation 1: my client’s PIP award was first contacted in feb 2019 stating that they had looked at her award as part of the MH/RJ administrative exercise and not changed their decision. She wasn’t given any prior opportunity to provide any evidence or input.  She put in a MR requesting that they look at the award again, not just in relation to MH/RJ principles, but other elements of her PIP award that she didn’t think were correct.  The MRN didn’t change the decision and the appeal will be heard next week.

QUESTIONS: should DWP have given an opportunity to provide evidence etc rather than to have just made a decision based on the paperwork as part of the review process?  When they did provide a decision, should they have looked at all aspects of the award as highlighted by the client or just the RJ/MH related matters?

Situation 2: the client has been in receipt of PIP since 2016.  Her case is clearly MH/RJ review worthy but she has never been contacted.  We have asked DWP to do this as part of an any time review request but they have ignored our request.  We sent to the tribunal service who have now forwarded to the DWP for response.  We have also made a complaint and the DWP have not addressed the issue so now going to ICE.

QUESTION: what are the rights re. forcing a MH/RJ review to be undertaken, if any?

As ever, your thoughts are gratefully received.

EKS

Interested to hear what happens here. At WRAC yesterday we heard of a similar case where the judge wouldn’t hear the appeal as he said there was no decision to appeal against.

My understanding is that they only look at issues directly related to MH/RJ as that is where there has been a law change - so psychological distress and mobility, and safety and supervision. Because the decision wasn’t challenged at the time you can’t now ask for them to revise it on the basis they got it wrong for any other reason.

However, I thought the outcome letter was a decision and had all the normal rights of MR/appeal - I can’t see why it wouldn’t be - you should be able to disagree with whether they have applied the new law correctly to the facts. Happy to raise this via stakeholders if they’re not letting you MR/appeal

A bit more info here - including that they just make the decison on the papers - no face-to-face assessment -

Overwhelming psychological distress and journeys: changes to PIP law from 28 November 2016

Safety and supervision: changes to PIP law from 9 March 2017

thanks both, will keep you posted