esa supersession question

i really should know the answer to this but i think the pip supersession debate has caused me to lose the plot.

client claims ESA
client sent for wca
client fails wca
decision reconsidered and placed in wrag
few years down the line there is a new wca
client fails wca

when the second failure occurs…which decision is being superseded?  the dwp in my case have superseded the original decision awarding ESA but surely it should be the determination they have LCFW that should be superseded here?

doesn’t the answer depend on why they sent him for new med?  they have to have made a decision to send him for a new WCA and to do that they must have some ground; then the new WCA result is taken as entitling them to supercede the entire entitlement decision…. yes?

The first decision is to award your client ESA pending assessment. This is superseded by the second decision which (after accounting for revision) places your client in the WRAG and increases entitlement.

So assuming that there are no other entitlement decisions, the newest decision is a supersession of the WRAG decision.

(That analysis might be different on a post-April 2017 claim - but I’m assuming that’s not the case here.)

I think Eliot has nearly got it right, but for the slip in ignoring the first WCA failure.

So;

1. client claims ESA - decision 1 is made - it has to be, otherwise there can be no entitlement. So this will be a decision that client does not have excess income or capital, has a right of residence, or for C-ESA, meets the NIC conditions etc.

2. client sent for wca - this is a decision (that the Department does not have sufficient information to determine LCFW without a medical assessment) but not an outcome decision.

3. client fails wca - decision 2 is made - no LCFW/no entitlement. This is a supersession decision.

4. decision reconsidered and placed in wrag - decision 3 is made - revising decision number 2. Not a supersession decision. It is as if decision 2 always was that client had LCFW.

5. few years down the line there is a new wca - a decision, but not an outcome decision, as per 2, above.

6. client fails wca - decision 4 is made - again a supersession decision. It supersedes the revised decision 2. Decision 4 takes effect from the date it was made.

when the second failure occurs…which decision is being superseded?  the dwp in my case have superseded the original decision awarding ESA but surely it should be the determination they have LCFW that should be superseded here?

It would require something other than a straightforward WCA failure for either decision 1 to be revised or superseded or for decision 2 to be revised or superseded other than from the date decision 4 is made.

thanks for the responses.  i had managed to completely doubt myself that superseding the original decision was wrong.

that outline makes complete sense on what should have happened.