I'm not sure if these issues were brought up before but I would like to find out what happens in other areas and what your opinions are on the following issues :

1. When the IB 50 forms are send out no information is included about the way the PCA works so a lot of people have no idea what the test is about. Whilst that is sometimes a good thing because it shows most often how restricted people are as they spontaneously explain their
problems I don't think it is legally correct.It is more like asking people to sign a contract without giving them access to the small print.

2. As far as I can see from the PCA appeals I take the Tribunals would only consider just enough points to pass even though there maybe enough evidence or enough information on the day to award more points.

Before I did not find it so important but now that there are more claimants who need to go to appeal more often and also now that the DWP is including previous decisions/assessments in the papers I find it is important that it could be shown that the person would have passed decisively at the time. I know that there are other issues, very much the fact that appelants are so distressed and that further probing could be seen as not serving a useful purpose. But in the long run I would think it is necessary

3. For the mental health points : For a while the decisions (DWP original decisions) given when the person failed also had a list of the descriptors that were given in mental health and not just the overall points. But this was abolished again some months ago. I would think that it is discriminatory as it still leaves the person in the dark about what aspects of their condition were recognised.

Any views welcome because we are due a Tribunal users meeting soon and also a meeting around the pathways to work