just wondering if anyone has any advice or had any problems in the following type of situation.

Client has mobility and care needs and decision was made to refuse dla. since refusal the client has now had occupational therapy aids such as shower chair, commode etc.

As they were not in place at the time of decision i am wondering the mileage in arguing that they should be disregarded. I am already preparing my client to list the problems he has when using these things to show there is still a care need but would rather i got the aids disregarded totally.

I get the feeling the tribunal can take them into account anyway as a reasonable adjustment or similar argument but i am always happy to be proven wrong if it will help my clients case.

thanks in advance.

Any tribunal decision will be made on the basis of the situation as it was on the day the decision was made. If aids were not in place on that day, they will not be taken into account. I would suspect you only need to be concerned if the client was in some way responsible for a delay in the provision of the aids.

Aids are something of a double edged sword. They demonstrate the severity of a client's condition, but soemtimes mean that as a result of the aid, the client can now perform many of the actions that might have lead to an award.

There is one more situation in whcih the aids might still be taken into account that comes to me on reflection. If there is reason to believe the aids would be put in place within six months of the decision, the needs in question would not be expected to continure of the next six months, and would therefore be inappropirate for consideration as part of a DLA award.

Unfortunately, one also has to bear in mind that a Tribunal is at liberty to suggest reasonable aids that might be available to be used, even where no such aids have been provided. For example, Tribunals regularly suggest perching stools, commodes (if they can be reasonably used in the situation), as a way of obviating needs. I personally think your best approach is to go with the points concerning how much difficulty or need for assistance or lack of proper safety there may be when the Appellant uses such aids.