× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Decision making and appeals  →  Thread

devastated! ... and confused!

 < 1 2

Vonny
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Social Inclusion Unit, Swansea

Send message

Total Posts: 486

Joined: 17 June 2010

What did you do to them?

dizzymare
forum member

Welfare benefits adviser - Dudley MBC

Send message

Total Posts: 318

Joined: 18 June 2010

Dan Manville - 09 May 2019 11:28 AM

Isn’t there a practice direction for dealing with vulnerable and child witnesses?

I’ve had similar at the same venue; I actually asked one Judge “do you know who I am?” before explaining who my clients were to assuage my temerity.

I’ve had a couple of cases where they’ve mooted dealing with cases at Birmingham CJC to take advantage of the additonal security there; one actually got that far. Ended up the first case I’ve seen a Tribunal use the panic button then leg it out of the room.

now that I would have liked to have seen .... I will have a look for the direction Dan, as I definitely thought I had read something about this (maybe some caselaw even) I shall be on a mission so am trying to prepare everything ready for when I get the SOR

Andyp5 Citizens Advice Bridport & District
forum member

Citizens Advice Bridport & District

Send message

Total Posts: 1005

Joined: 9 January 2017

I think the following has in the annex the Tribunal Practice direction Dan mentioned (may have been updated), but the whole doc may be of interest ‘developed for the First Tier Immigration and Asylum Chamber following
the Guidance issued by the Senior President of Tribunals regarding
Child, Vulnerable Adult and Sensitive Witnesses1
. Although specific to these groups it is also a reminder of good judgecraft’.

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ChildWitnessGuidance.pdf

dizzymare
forum member

Welfare benefits adviser - Dudley MBC

Send message

Total Posts: 318

Joined: 18 June 2010

brilliant Andy - thank you. that’s my job for tomorrow

ClairemHodgson
forum member

Solicitor, SC Law, Harrow

Send message

Total Posts: 1221

Joined: 13 April 2016

Andyp5 Citizens Advice Bridport & District
forum member

Citizens Advice Bridport & District

Send message

Total Posts: 1005

Joined: 9 January 2017

Just for completeness have added the wotsit below because the above makes references to it.

https://www.judiciary.uk/publications/new-edition-of-the-equal-treatment-bench-book-launched/

dizzymare
forum member

Welfare benefits adviser - Dudley MBC

Send message

Total Posts: 318

Joined: 18 June 2010

im so grateful to you all for the support and for the very useful information, lots of bedtime reading 😊

dizzymare
forum member

Welfare benefits adviser - Dudley MBC

Send message

Total Posts: 318

Joined: 18 June 2010

soooo .... I have to reinstate this thread concerning this horrible case as im seeking further advice/confirmation if I may please.  After a year, we finally have the decision set aside! it took 7 months (and a complaint to HMCTS) to get the statement of reasons. When we finally received it, there were more holes than in a fishing net, and it seems that the Judge agrees as he has just set the decision aside without the need to go to UT. We are therefore back to where we were (for now, anyway as the decision is now due for review again!)

To recap:
clt transferred from DLA to PIP and was awarded SR DL and SR Mob   appointee not happy and went to appeal;
FTT awarded EDL and SR Mob - appointee not happy (with mob) and went to UT - decision set aside (so puts us back to SR DL and SR mob?)
2nd appeal was the horror detailed above and clt awarded SR DL and no Mob! - decision now set aside. (so again, puts us back to SR DL and SR Mob?)

appointee does not want to attend another appeal (understandably); the issues around her son attending (even if we could in current times) have not diminished and she will still struggle to get him to a hearing (though it is possible of course that this will be a telephone hearing as things stand; and the written evidence is very strong).

My question is, if she now withdraws the appeal, am I correct in thinking that the award that she had in the first place ie SR DL and SR Mob would be paid? I have no doubt that client qualifies for a higher level of award but understand appointees concerns. Obviously, it has to be her decision (and I think she should go back to appeal) but just want to be certain of the consequences, should she decide to withdraw.   

thank you for your support.

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3117

Joined: 14 July 2014

The DWP decision stands until it is set aside by a tribunal on appeal.

The two Tribunal decisions have been themselves set aside so it is as though they never happened.

If your client withdraws their appeal, the DWP decision (i.e. SR/SR) will continue to operate.

There is an absolute right to withdraw the appeal unless a specific direction requires the tribunal to consent to the appeal being withdrawn.

dizzymare
forum member

Welfare benefits adviser - Dudley MBC

Send message

Total Posts: 318

Joined: 18 June 2010

Thank you Elliot - just wanted to confirm this so will now see how she wants to proceed.

dizzymare
forum member

Welfare benefits adviser - Dudley MBC

Send message

Total Posts: 318

Joined: 18 June 2010

A quick update - this lady did not withdraw the appeal for her son. The appeal went ahead, and finally, after all this time, and stress, we were vindicated and an award was made of EDL and E mob. Hopefully, all will go well from now on.

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3117

Joined: 14 July 2014

Hurray, got there in the end.

I do find it odd that we are told that consistency is one of the reasons for introducing PIP assessments but this gentleman’s case has been assessed by four different decision makers with four different outcomes (SR/SR, ER/SR, SR/- and ER/ER).

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3773

Joined: 14 April 2010

dizzymare - 14 July 2020 05:58 PM

A quick update - this lady did not withdraw the appeal for her son. The appeal went ahead, and finally, after all this time, and stress, we were vindicated and an award was made of EDL and E mob. Hopefully, all will go well from now on.

Great result .... and thanks too for sharing about how it worked out 😊

Mike Hughes
forum member

Senior welfare rights officer - Salford City Council Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 3138

Joined: 17 June 2010

Elliot Kent - 15 July 2020 09:11 AM

Hurray, got there in the end.

I do find it odd that we are told that consistency is one of the reasons for introducing PIP assessments but this gentleman’s case has been assessed by four different decision makers with four different outcomes (SR/SR, ER/SR, SR/- and ER/ER).

I know what you mean but I don’t find it odd at all. Consistency absolutely was not one of the reasons DLA was replaced by PIP. I do look back at this thread and can’t help but suspect this would have been resolved a lot sooner had there been no debate about the appellant attending.

Andyp5 Citizens Advice Bridport & District
forum member

Citizens Advice Bridport & District

Send message

Total Posts: 1005

Joined: 9 January 2017

Amazing stuff amazing feats Dizzy!