Summary of grounds of the appeal - should i raise it?

Client of mine is appealing a DLA decision (nil award)

I’ve just received DWP response and in the summary of grounds of appeal they’ve stated that:

B). xxx disagrees with the decsion because “she is disabled so should be entitled to DLA”

They further state in section 6 that again “xxx disagrees with the decision because she is disabled and should be entitled to benefit. However entitlement to DLA depends on a persons need ......blah blah blah…. rather than the disability itself”

No where in either her original claim pack or GL24 (which I completed with her) does she say this, and I’m slightly confused as to why they would state this in their response. Should I raise this in my submission and clarify that she hasn’t actually said this at all?

I feel it creates totally the wrong impression of my client yet at the same time seems a bit petty considering there are lots of other issues regarding her care and mobility needs which I will be arguing.

Any thoughts much appreciated.

Yes, it is puzzling why they would make this statement if you’re sure that it isn’t something that has been included in the claim pack or letter of appeal.

So yes, I think it is worth inserting a short paragraph, perhaps at the outset of the submission, stating clearly that “Mrs XXX has appealed the refusal of DLA on the following grounds (not simply that she is disabled and therefore entitled as per para X.X)....”

The wording quoted is bog standard and used in just about every DLA appeal submission I have ever seen. It must just be tun off the word processor.

There is another standard phrase, or variation thereof, which the DWP in particular use in response to new evidence (no matter how compelling the evidence).  It generally goes along the lines of “The Decision Maker has considered the evidence provided by the appellant but found no reason to change the decision”.

The evidence itself does not get substantively addressed in any shape or form.

Similarly, it is standard practice to state “Mr x can walk a reasonable distance” when there is no evidence that he can walk more than 30 metres without severe discomfort, or “He does not need help with personal care” when the only evidence on care needs is on the claim form.  It appears that appeal writers do not feel the need to justify how they jump to such conclusions when all the available evidence supports the case.  They seem to rely on standard phrases instead of actually explaining why they have rejected the evidence.  Disappointing.