× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Work capability issues and ESA  →  Thread

By eck it’s a rare day i’m stumped…

 < 1 2

Tom H
forum member

Newcastle Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 783

Joined: 23 June 2010

Dan Manville - 09 March 2015 12:17 PM

The problem though is that there are bank statements from the Turkish bank on the submission so I think an argument founded on Kerr is weak.

To be fair Dan that is new info which obviously affects the relevance of Kerr here. I’m not sure Kerr is rendered completely irrelevant, however.  If she can show that she has done all she reasonably could to access the money then the Dept would have to explain why that wasn’t enough and why the capital should still be taken into account. 

 

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Tom H - 10 March 2015 12:43 PM
Dan Manville - 09 March 2015 12:17 PM

The problem though is that there are bank statements from the Turkish bank on the submission so I think an argument founded on Kerr is weak.

To be fair Dan that is new info which obviously affects the relevance of Kerr here. I’m not sure Kerr is rendered completely irrelevant, however.  If she can show that she has done all she reasonably could to access the money then the Dept would have to explain why that wasn’t enough and why the capital should still be taken into account.

But it will still be for the Tribunal Judge to rule whether it’s of any value in the face of those efforts; is it to all intents and purposes lost? That will be key.

Ironically I’m pretty sure this will be adjourned for entirely different reasons; JCP are now asserting that they determined the IR claim back in 2011 and are basing the entitlement decision on an ESA3 issued last Jan; you’ll note from my first post in ‘13 that they told me it was still under consideration.

We will, I suspect, be adjourning for docs; although they could still kill it at one sitting if we lose on the valuation/possession issue as the value back in ‘11 was just over £16k.

I now am in a position where I might end up submitting this thread in evidence… Not the first time I’ve submitted a thread from a discussion board in evidence mind!

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

It’s finally heard and it succeeded; the asset was held to be the bank’s promise of payment rather than the cash value; it’s sale value as an asset…

It wasn’t worth much with all the attempts to recover it and I am a very happy bunny.

Oh, and the date of claim was agreed to be 2011 so my cash gains will get a healthy bump.

Claire Hodgson
forum member

PI Team, BHP Law, Durham

Send message

Total Posts: 165

Joined: 17 October 2013

Dan Manville - 04 November 2015 04:05 PM

It’s finally heard and it succeeded; the asset was held to be the bank’s promise of payment rather than the cash value; it’s sale value as an asset…

It wasn’t worth much with all the attempts to recover it and I am a very happy bunny.

Oh, and the date of claim was agreed to be 2011 so my cash gains will get a healthy bump.

nice one.

shame your client had to spend so many years until it could be sorted, though….

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

Claire Hodgson - 04 November 2015 04:39 PM
Dan Manville - 04 November 2015 04:05 PM

It’s finally heard and it succeeded; the asset was held to be the bank’s promise of payment rather than the cash value; it’s sale value as an asset…

It wasn’t worth much with all the attempts to recover it and I am a very happy bunny.

Oh, and the date of claim was agreed to be 2011 so my cash gains will get a healthy bump.

nice one.

shame your client had to spend so many years until it could be sorted, though….

I could point fingers but I won’t, suffice to say it wasn’t DWP’s fault; however this is the second time recently that they’ll be kicking themselves over the fact that some claims just get left on the back burner with no decision for years. A symptom of the stretching of resources at JCP; decisions don’t get notified on cases they perceive to be no hopers and eventually we can revive what would once have been a very dead claim.