Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
Review of DLA Results in increased award but 6 months hence.
Recently, I have had 2 cases where I applied for reviews, which have resulted in increases but from 6 months after the date of the review request. Also other advisors have experienced similar. Mandatory reconsiderations have been requested. There is no logic to these awards apart from the DWP applying a silent cut. Has anyone experienced similar.
Yees, a similar couple of cases, but the claimants didn’t want to challenge it so no recon requested.
Do you have this sentence in the decision?
“As you are over 65, you can’t get the increased rate care until you have satisfied the disability conditions for six months…..”
If you do they are saying your client doesn’t meet the conditions until 6 months after the review was requested due to not satisfying the disability conditions - if you don’t then i have no idea why they’re not paying back to the date of the review request.
Is this DLA to PIP or DLA to DLA?
We’re waiting on counsel’s opinion of any challenge to the PIP transitional provisions that only make an award from the date of decision. If it’s worth sharing I shall strive to.
Two of my cases have recently resulted in substantial increases in benefit for previous DLA claimants who claimed PIP, but, I believe, from 4 weeks after the DLA payment day that followed the date of the PIP award letter (Transitional Regs). Did you get an opinion from counsel that might help?
My clients have missed out on what would have been substantial backdated entitlement. The local MP has written to Iain Duncan Smith pointing out that this disadvantages some previous DLA claimants compared to “new” disability benefit claimants whose claims would be backdated to the date of claim however delayed the assessment process was and that he understood the transitional rules were intended to cover scenarios where the PIP award resulted in less benefit than the previous DLA one and the DWP would have difficulty claiming back payments made.
Isn’t there a common law principle that an agency should not benefit from its own wrongdoing? Therefore that the organisation responsible for the delays should not be be able to pay out less benefit because of its own shortcomings? I think it could be argued that clients should be compensated at least for the difference between the length of time the assessment actually took and the time it should have taken. Are there any statements you know of by the GOvernment or DWP as to how long a PIP claim assessment should last?
Please reply with any updates on current law to this scenario.
my client was on dla low care, condition worsens , asks for review of dla award. told she must claim pip, claims pip, 9 months later pip award made at standard care. paid from date of pip decision. client has lost 10 months potential dla at middle care as she got low dla care up to date of pip decision. who do I appeal to ? pip or dla or can I appeal at all ?
looks like a loophole, but can it be fixed ???
Please reply with any updates on current law to this scenario.
my client was on dla low care, condition worsens , asks for review of dla award. told she must claim pip, claims pip, 9 months later pip award made at standard care. paid from date of pip decision. client has lost 10 months potential dla at middle care as she got low dla care up to date of pip decision. who do I appeal to ? pip or dla or can I appeal at all ?
looks like a loophole, but can it be fixed ???
The issue was discussed here - Migration to PIP from DLA - ?discrimination
Not sure anything has changed for the better since.
Thanks Paul,
I see the govt line is to complain to atos or whoever did the assessment, surely as atos are an agency working for the govt the govt are responsible for the actions of their agents. surely a claimant could bring a civil claim against the dwp for compensation.