My colleague can remember reading somewhere that the DWP can not rely on a medical report that is 3 months old to make a decision on a PCA. The decision related to the point that 3 months was too long a gap. We have looked through our own resources and have not been able to find any reference to the decision. Does anyone have any info to clarify this or is it wishfull thinking?

We have had some success with these cases in Glasgow.

The case we have been quoting is Wood v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions <2003> EWCA Civ 53.

The basic argument is that the decision under appeal will (probably) be a supersession under Reg 6(2)(g). Therefore the receipt of the medical report by the Decision Maker is the gateway that allows them to supersede.

The Wood case says that the outcome decision (in your case that your client is fit for work) must be directly related and linked to the supersession gateway. So if the report is already three months out of date and given that IB is a daily benefit then the outcome decision is fatally flawed by using a report that is potentially no longer relevant to the client's condition.

It is always open to argument how long before a report becomes too old but I reckon you should have a good chance with three months.

Hope this makes sense.

David