Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
SG supersessions
I’d be interested to know what people’s experience is on how DWP is dealing with ESA SG supersessions.
Call me paranoid (who said that?) but I think I’m beginning to see a pattern form, where DWP appears to be doing all in their power to obstruct the process. I’ve had two very recent examples. Both clients are currently in WRAG. In both cases, we obtained medical evidence which clearly backs up SG criteria (absolutely no possible argument against in either case that I can identify). In the first example, DWP refused to deal with the supersession request at all (they sent everthing we had submitted back to the client with a brief letter stating any changes in circs would be considered at his next WCA medical) and matter wasn’t resolved until second stage of complains procedure and in the other example client has now been told (in writing) that matter has been referred back to ATOS and that he may be sent further ESA50 and should expect to attend further medical. Client is now considering withdrawing request as he is afraid he may fail the WCA altogether.
How does it seem to be working for the rest of you?
Locally there was a standard pro-forma letter going out from JCP saying that unless the claimant could explain when their condition had changed and what the evidence was, it would be treated as a late appeal. Snag with that is that some people (often MH) are outside the absolute 13-month time limit.
On the other hand, one supersession request has gone off and the WCA is being reapplied. Unlike DLA where the rules aren’t strictly applied for supersessions, JCP are being fussy about starting off ESA supersessions (volume of work I assume following ESA(C) cut-off).
The problem is that many people could have gone into the support group via appeal, but didn’t bother at the time (a) because they were unaware it even existed and/or (b) couldn’t be bothered for the extra six quid or so. However, with the 12 month cut-off on ESA(C) it’s a different story now.
Locally there was a standard pro-forma letter going out from JCP saying that unless the claimant could explain when their condition had changed and what the evidence was, it would be treated as a late appeal. Snag with that is that some people (often MH) are outside the absolute 13-month time limit.
On the other hand, one supersession request has gone off and the WCA is being reapplied. Unlike DLA where the rules aren’t strictly applied for supersessions, JCP are being fussy about starting off ESA supersessions (volume of work I assume following ESA(C) cut-off).
The problem is that many people could have gone into the support group via appeal, but didn’t bother at the time (a) because they were unaware it even existed and/or (b) couldn’t be bothered for the extra six quid or so. However, with the 12 month cut-off on ESA(C) it’s a different story now.
Jobcentreplus, eh! It’s enough to make a cat laugh. A lot of supersessions would not be on change of circs’ but would be on grounds of “ignorance of, or mistake as to, some material fact”.
Have to say we have a very close look at the ESA85s for all those missing material facts!
Seems like our experiences are fairly common, then.
Our clients are also receiving a standard letter advising that they should be making a late appeal against the original decision placing them in WRAG. A few clients report that they are being sent for medicals, but it’s not clear whether this is as a result of a supercession request or because they were due for another medical anyway.