Hi- forgive any typos- I'm still fuming. But should I be?

I've just had a DLA appeal tribunal adjourned because I questioned the validity of part the GP's report that the DWP obtained as evidence.

In part 6 of the GP's report, it asks for details IF KNOWN of the effects of the disabling condition on everyday life. The GP has stated that the client can self care ("can manage").

When I wrote to the GP for an opinion on her ability to self care given her medical conditions, he told me that he hasn't seen the client for over a year, and that "I really do not feel confident to answer the questions with accuracy".

The DWP decision maker has based part of the decision on this stating that the client "can manage her personal care by day or night."

I asked the judge if he would disregard this section of the GP's report (the GP's knowledge of the client's day to day life), as the GP has admitted that he cannot answer the question with accuracy (despite doing so for the DWP). The Tribunal then would, presumably, rely on the appellant's evidence of the disabling conditions effect on her everyday life.

Firstly, the Judge told me that we were not there to look at contradictions in evidence (aren't we??), before admitting that he hadn't seen the part of the bundle of evidence containing the GP's letter. Then he said that the Tribunal would adjourn and instruct an EMP's examination, and "what does your representative think?"

I said, I didn't think it was appropriate, that the EMP would no more be able to give an opinion of the effects of the disabling condition on day to day life (other than what the client tells him), than her own GP, and that the diagnosis and medical history still stands.

The judge then said that "you may think that, but we have decided that this is what is going to happen". I then asked how the EMP's report will be used, given that the appeal is about circumstances as they were 8 months ago (I was genuinely curious), as the client's condition has changed. The judge fudged this, so I asked him again, to which he more or less banged his gavel and said that the "Tribunal is not here to argue with reps- off you go!" Off you go!

I'm considering complaining about him, but wonder what you think about the fairness of the adjournment.

For what its worth, my opinion is that the tribunal were perfectly within their rights to adjourn the case and (whatever our opinion of such reports) ask for an EMP to visit.

The question of how relevant the EMP report would be and what weight could be given to it would be a question for the next hearing and I'm sure that, unless the report was wholly supportive, it is something you would want to make make a submission about at that time.

The comments about looking at contradictions in evidence are worrying if that is what was meant as I don't think they could properly carry out their judicial function without assessing the reliability of the evidence.

'Off you go' is also I think inappropriate language - especially if the appellant was present.

If you feel strongly about it then complain but I don't think you will get anywhere with their decision to adjourn.

David

Thanks, David.

I've decided not to complain if it's just for the sake of my bruised ego. The judge in question is a comedy (tragicomic) world's worst woodwork teacher type and he can't bear reps in general.

I just need to concentrate on what's best for my client. You never know, we might get a really, really supportive EMP report.