Support group/WRAG

fOLLOWING A SUCCESSFUL lt RE esa client   has   now   been informed review occurred   prior to LT ( unknown to me or appellant) so he   is   back   in WRAG - is a Man Recon the   best (quickest) way to take this foward?

Thanks   in advance

I’ll translate what I understand…

Q: A client was successful before the First tier Tribunal and was placed into the Support Group. However, unbeknownst to the client, his capability for work had been re-assessed during the appeal and he had been placed into the WRAG; res-judicata steps in to supersede the Tribunal’s decision so despite the successful outcome said client has remained in the WRAG.

What would be the best way forward? A Mandatory Reconsideration request?

Thank you for taking the time to help.

English (and a wee smatter of latin) the language of the Gods!

A: It depends when the new WCA decision was made…

I would make them all learn English. The clever ones I would teach Latin, as an honour and Greek, as a treat - Winston Churchill (I think - paraphrased, probably.)

Pendente appellatione si iudicium de petente et WCA deesse non debet ad iudicium invetionem adsertor favorem prioris appellationis recognita, et his non ad tribunal appellationis causam cognoscere cessat. Quaero, cur non sortiatur petat?

If an appeal is pending concerning a decision that a claimant is not entitled to ESA for failing the WCA and the decision is revised in the claimant’s favour prior to the appeal, then the appeal lapses and the tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the case.  My question is, why wasn’t the claimant notified?

You must be good at Latin because that is exactly how Google translates it: you didn’t make any mistakes at all!

HB Anorak - 11 July 2014 10:31 AM

You must be good at Latin because that is exactly how Google translates it: you didn’t make any mistakes at all!

I bombed out of Latin in my third year.  I got sick and tired of reciting passages about Agricola and Imperator.  Isn’t Google wonderful?

Thanks for all your   information and especially the Latin.

However what is the   information/ criteria re when the WCA was   made - as fAR AS i UNDERSTAND   IT   IT   OCCURRED AFTER THE (sorry) date of the decision but   before the tribunal.

There is   no other   information eg change of circs which applies and   might make a difference

Thanks in advance

nevip - 11 July 2014 10:01 AM

My question is, why wasn’t the claimant notified?

If claimant was in the WRAG, reassessed on scrutiny and left there he may well have just received a standard entitlement notice and not realised it signified he’d been reassessed.

Certainly what happens round these parts.

Check the rules on supersessions. The DWP can’t just do one. If there has been a relevant change or a new medical report, this would be sufficient. If the SoS has no grounds to supersede, though, the original decision should remain in force (I believe).

Edmund Shepherd - 11 July 2014 11:20 AM

Check the rules on supersessions. The DWP can’t just do one. If there has been a relevant change or a new medical report, this would be sufficient. If the SoS has no grounds to supersede, though, the original decision should remain in force (I believe).

The facts of this case are far from clear.  However, the legal position is as follows.  A decision under appeal can be revised in the claimant’s favour by the Secretary of State on his own initiative.  This is a Social Security Act 1998 s9 revision decision (and, see reg 3(4A) D&A Regs) and not a s10 supersession decision.  Thus, there is no need for any further legal ground to be made out other than the fact that the SoS thinks, on the available evidence, that the original decision was wrong.  A tribunal thus has no jurisdiction unless a fresh appeal is lodged.  S10 supersession decisions are subject to much more technical rules and are available on specified grounds and can take effect from different dates.  A s10 decision does not lapse the original appeal and the tribunal’s decision is only effective until the date that the superseding decision takes effect.

Brings about an interesting quandary… the period of an award. Say claimant was in wrag from week 14, call it date a and they reassessed from date b, what’s the actual mechanism for changing the period.

The period is at the discretion of the sec state unless there’s a change of circs meriting supersession from WRAG to SG (or capable of work).

However if the Sec State reassessed, decided not to supersede (which in itself carries appeal rights) wouldn’t the original decision still hold? Thus the decision appeal should be binding on the unsuperseded situation at reassessment unless a change of circs was identified.

It’s Friday, I shouldn’t be having thoughts like that!

I don’t understand what would have triggered the claim to be reassessed if it was a straight WCA failure/appeal.

I’ve only ever known that happen when (a) the client has made a new ESA claim in tandem with appealing against the original termination decision (often on the well-meaning advice of someone at the contact centre) so that at some point before the appeal is heard there is a second WCA decision; or (b) the client has notified DWP of a new condition or substantial deterioration whilst the appeal is ongoing (and decision has been superseeded).

Otherwise, I can’t imagine a set of circumstances in which a reassessment would have occured.

1964 - 14 July 2014 08:36 AM

I don’t understand what would have triggered the claim to be reassessed if it was a straight WCA failure/appeal.

I’ve only ever known that happen when (a) the client has made a new ESA claim in tandem with appealing against the original termination decision (often on the well-meaning advice of someone at the contact centre) so that at some point before the appeal is heard there is a second WCA decision; or (b) the client has notified DWP of a new condition or substantial deterioration whilst the appeal is ongoing (and decision has been superseeded).

Otherwise, I can’t imagine a set of circumstances in which a reassessment would have occured.

“back in WRAG” by the OP would suggest that this was a WRAG/SG appeal rather than a WCA failure. 12 month prognosis would likely mean a reassessment during the lifetime of the appeal

Ah. That makes sense. Missed that….