Hello all,

I have a PCA appeal. Client receives DLA HRM and LRC. In GL24 I argued that HRM award would suggest that her walking ability very limited as awarded on basis virutally unable to walk. (She wasnt given any points for walking) Client told me could only walk 20 yards or so.

I ve just received the schedule of evidence for ICB appeal and client put on IB50 that she can walk up to 400 yards before she needs to stop!

Im worried that local office may share this with the DLA unit and compromise DLA award.

Does anyone know whether this would be likely? Could that (IB50) be used as grounds for superceding DLA award?

Rita

Some local offices do and some don't. We cover an area which is served by two different offices. Have had a case where the PO notified DLA that cl could walk more than 100 yds, but the assessment for mob had been made by an EMP so DLA just sent a questionnaire asking about changes in her condition.

our local JC+ appear to do it routinely, as IB50 asks for DLA rates in pay they then send the failed PCA to DBC.

have seen a number of different results from DBC ignoring it fully even on nil pots for walking, to superseding without issuing a claim pack etc.

concerns me that this isnt happening across the board, whn i asked the JC+ appeals section if they are acting on directions "from above" they merely stated "no, its something we've always done" yet i've seen a lot more of it over the past 2 years

I've found that using awards of DLA HRM as evidence to support the walking descriptor in PCA appeals can be a double edged sword. I once went in to a tribunal and at the outset the chair beamed at the the PO and said "hmm your colleagues in Blackpool think that Mr x is virtually unable to walk!". The PO conceded almost immediately and we were trotting out with a successful decision within 5 minutes. However on the other hand I've had cases where the tribunal have not allowed 15 points for walking and that leaves you a bit worried about the DLA HRM. The worst case was when a tribunal allowed the client's appeal, but didn't give 15 points for walking and the chair expressly stated on the decision notice that he could not accept the client's walking was limited to 50 metres or something to that effect. A PO was in attendance and I was quite worried that he could inform Blackpool, but to my knowledge her DLA has not been reviewed.

I suppose it must be down to the PO attending on the day whether or not to inform Blackpool of any 'relevent'information relating to a DLA award. Given that the DWP have a right to carry out periodic enquiries, any information received from another DWP dept. could legitimately trigger a review. Although they couldn't simply withdraw a DLA award- they would have to go through the review process.

Hi Sara. In my part of the county I have come across a case this year in which an Atos Origin report for incapacity purposes has been used as grounds for a review of a previously indefinite award of DLA. Had we won the IB appeal I would certainly have used this as evidence for the DLA appeal, but sadly we had an awful hearing (it was the one in which the Chairman refused to ask the Mental health questions) and my client subsequently withdrew her DLA appeal.

So there are good grounds to be worried, I'm afraid.

Further to my last post,I have just read your post more closely Rita, and can see that your client's problem is far more fundamental than that. Have you discussed the IB50 with your client, and checked that her estimation of 400 yards is sound? If it's not you could swiftly point this out to the DWP and provide a more accurate estimation, although this could make things worse by drawing attention to the issue at this stage...

Do you know on what basis the original DLA award was made? HM can be awarded for things other than distance for the VUTW test. It may not therefore be a question of distance that would compromise the DLA - although why is client telling you 20yds, but telling DWP 400?

I read that you say the DLA was awarded by virtue of client being VUTW - have you confirmed this with anything other than what client says? Just thinking it may have been on basis of exertion constituting danger to life. That leads to HM and is not confined to a limited distance.

Also, what evidence was used for the DLA award. It may have been based on a really good EMP report (if such a thing exists?!?) which could be used to overcome a poor IB85.

We have had chairmen arrange for such information to sent to DBU in the past.
However, how did your lady get the DLA HRM in the first instance - GP report, EMP visit or merely on the claim form info. Has her condition improved..? In your experience and based on observations do you think that 300/400 yards is feasible?

I think it was Comm Rowlands that said that the general public was notoriously bad at judging distances - how did your Lady arrive at such a figure - or has her condition improved ........?

Well thanks for the repsonses.

Client has rheumatoid arthritis so pretty sure DLA award based on Virtually unable to walk. Client told me that DLA awarded as could only walk 20 yards, given 'lifetime' award. Got the impression that she has been on it for years, although seeing her next week so will double check. Client was so adamant that i had no concerns about arguing point on GL24 and as for her judgment of distances, well i did quiz her and she seemed accurate. I have measured from our front door to various shops on the road and she was pretty much on the mark.

She was silent on the issue about the 400 yards, and couldnt really explain why she put it. She did fill in the form herself. i am seeing her soon so will ask some of your questions.

Thank you all for your reponses, very helpful. Will keep you posted.

I used to be a Decision Maker for JC+ and the guidance has been for many years to inform DBU of failed PCA's if Clt has put DLA details on the IB50. They don't always follow them up though.Perhaps she just didn't understand the question on the IB50 or someone else filled it in?

Well ive discussed this case further with the client. HRM DLA was awarded primarily because of COPD not arthritis, so possibly on exertion of walking grounds, although i doubt it.

Award was for an indefinite period. EMP visited for DLA claim so will try an get copy of the EMP report from DBU to support ICB as condition still the same if not worse, but am worried that this may prompt DBU to look at DLA claim again? They may wonder why we are making the request?

As for distances I asked her again, and it seems that she did overestimate. Its proving very difficult to get evidence from her. Her medication seems to make her very groggy and unable to sustain a conversation. There are mental health issues as well. I am writing to her GP. Not heard anything from DBU yet, fingers crossed they will overlook this one!

Make sure your clt attends the tribunal feeling just as groggy and mention the IB50 entry on walking in submission before they ask about it. As for the EMP visit, depends on when it was, tribunal make a big thing about the date of the decision, if the EMP visit was years ago, they probably will say it's not relevant evidence.GP evidence on effort tolerence due to COPD would help and what about exceptional circs?

Had a client who had DLA @ MRC. Dropped to LRC on renewal. We lodged an appeal. Just had notifiction that on reconsideration client is now awared HRC!!!

They say decision was based on her PCA carried out 3 months earlier!

So not all bad news

Saffron
You do realise that if DWP officers read the postings on this sight and you have given them plenty of ammunition to withdraw your client's award of HRM.
Mark

Hi mark,

My latest posting clarifies that client's judgement of distance is probably not very accurate and that her medication makes her very confused.

But thanks i take your point.