Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
FTA composition
Given that there has been some regional variations in how appeals against negative determinations for failing to return PIP forms and attend consultations are listed, it may be helpful to note that the UT has now confirmed that these cases should be heard by a full panel of three members and not a single judge. (c.f. equivalent ESA appeals which should be heard by a single judge.)
Judge Wikeley comments:
I have to say it is entirely unclear to me as a matter of logic, policy or principle why the Practice Statement stipulates that an appeal against a failure to attend a PIP assessment is heard by a three-person FTT panel as with any other PIP appeal (and as should have happened in this case) whereas a failure to attend an ESA assessment is heard by a Judge sitting alone (as correctly took place in CH v SSWP (ESA))
The case may also be of interest for the criticism of the threadbare submission in the case which was described as “shockingly inadequate”. Certainly the quoted part of the submission looks like one or two of the bundles in my desk.
Certainly the quoted part of the submission looks like one or two of the bundles in my desk.
The two on my desk have simply consisted of excerpts of the notepad; exotic abbreviation and acronyms included, copied and pasted into the submission. They’re barely readable.
and i was interested to note that the claimant in that case in fact works for the DWP, and that the FT judge who is now overruled hadn’t engaged with any of the reasons the claimant hadn’t attended ......