This is driving me mad! Where are the regulations relating to renewal claims of DLA & AA?
I've been looking through Bonner and can't find it.
Someone, somewhere rescue me!

In what respect Carole? I only ask because I was very firmly reminded by a PO at a DLA appeal that "Following Commissioners decisions, we look upon all renewal claims as new claims": Chairman vigourously nodding head in agreement...............

Now that's just rubbish Mike in so many ways I hope you were vigorously shaking your head at the same time and saying "I repsectfully draw both your nobility's attention to paragraphs 34-41 of CSDLA/65/03 which so clearly explain the emaning of paragraph 16 of R(M)1/96, which was presumably the basis of your misapprehension in the first place." Or something.

Not that that helps Carol though. Do you mean Reg 13C SS (C&P) regs 1987 Carol? That only applies to DLA, which is why CSA/248/2002 said the principles of CDLA/3848/2001 could only apply to DLA and not AA, until CDLA/2751/2003 changed all of that anyway.

Respectfully, even, although the idea of a sect of reps fully doing something is moderately attractive.

Client was getting HRMC & MRCC; reduced to nil on renewal. Hard to see where the justification for such a drastic reduction came from. I mentioned as much in the tribunal and, like Mike, had the PO saying there was no requirement to show why the decision differed from an earlier one.
tribunal did not go our way - only came out with LRCC. So I'll be interested to see the statement of reasons.
I like a "sect of reps", is that the accepted collective noun? I quite like "an argument of reps" or even "a charm of reps" but then it is Friday afternoon.

The other one they trot out all the time, is that "Well the original decsion was made without the benefit (?) of a EMP report" the inference being of course that it was far too generous.

We all know that these attempts to ignore past decisions are a load of tosh, particularly where the medical conditions are progressive - arthritis etc, but why it's so much hard work sometimes getting Chairs to recognise that.

The other standard paragraph that now comes up in S of S submissions is to the effect that the EMp is an independent practioner, especially trained is carrying out these assessments etc etc - I've seen a very short Comm's decision to the effect that EMP are far from independent, given that they work for what is in effect almost an arms length branch of the Department.


"In general, the art of government
consists in taking as much money as possible
from one party of the citizens to give to the other".
-- Voltaire (1764)