Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
Delay in WCA
I have a service user who applied for ESA in July and is still awaiting a medical assessment. Is there anything I can do to push this forward? Complaint? Maladministration? She reaches pensionable age in July but she’s been living on 67.50 for over six months and is just about at the end of her tether.
Please see my thread made today on this issue you raised.
Thanks for that.
Have referred to MP who says he has taken it up and written a letter of complaint myself with no response to date.
My problem is I’m not qualified to do JR and I don’t think my employer would risk it regardless. Do you think a notice of intention would be enough to call their bluff ?
In the meantime client is in serious debt and heading for a breakdown. Any wise words?
Please look at my post dated the 20th march - It’s my belief that clients who have not had an ATOS medical after the 13 week assessment phase are entitled to the work related activity component from week 13 up until a Decision Maker finds them fit for work after an ATOS medical (if this being the case). I have just won this arguement at the First Tier Tribunal. NB This decision is still open to appeal by the DWP. John Mckendrick
here’s a link to the other thread -
I did see the other thread and it’s a very useful argument and worth a punt but with my cynical head on I can’t see the DWP rolling over and paying everyone who hasn’t had an assessment in 13 weeks the WRAG component so I need to continue to press for an assessment ASAP.
[ Edited: 22 Mar 2012 at 10:41 am by J Hogg ]Thought you might be interested in this response to my clients MP.
She has now been offered an appointment for early April.
[ Edited: 12 Jul 2012 at 11:28 am by J Hogg ]With regards the DWP’s written reply, where in the ESA Regs is there a mechanism for the DWP to make back payments of the work related activity component (“WRAC”) if the client is found unfit for work at a later date. Secondly when would they pay the said back payment back to. I believe they may make such a back payment back to the end of the 13 week assessment phase and if so are they not admitting that the assessment phase does indeed end at the end of 13 weeks from initial application of the benefit! If the DWP did pay the WRAC after week 13 without a limited capability for work assessment and determination then later made a determination in finding the applicant fit for work, would this actual result in an overpayment - the Decision Maker’s decision would be valid from the actual date is was made! Oppinion please!
Thought you might be interested in this response to my clients MP.
Just in case you’ve missed it, your client’s name is clearly stated and visible in the letter. It is also possible to make it our even where redacted.
In the context of the content, since when was hardship “deemed”? Surely it is a question of fact.
The extract I found particularly laughable, yet paradoxically unfunny, was the lip-service PR being trotted out: “We take customer service very seriously, and value any feedback that helps improve the quality of service we provide to all our customers”. If that is true, I submit this as proof positive there is a parallel universe…
AKA: ‘It’s all Harrington’s fault, but if we renegotiate the contract we can make it all so much better for er…erm…an increase in our contract fee’
J.Mckendrick
Whilst I think you’re right about the ending of the assessment phase (and well done spotting what I think we all missed), I’m still not sure that that justifies payment of the WRAC from week 14.
Condtions for entitlement to the WRAC are set out in section 2(3) WRA 2007. The conditon that the assessment phase has ended is only one conditon, ie section 2(3)(a). But how does your argument overcome the other condition found in 2(3)(b)?
Good luck at the UT all the same.
Sec. 2(3)(b) Welfare Reform Act 2007 is identicle to that of Sec. 4(5)(a), this being the very section the DWP quoted in their counter arguement in my case. Both identical sections are easily satisfied in that any client supplying a GP sick/note to evidence being unfit for work is deemed to have ‘limited capability for work’ only and not limited capability for work related activity as per Reg 30 ESA Regs 2008 and the Medical Evidence Regulations!
Yes, I see. The fact he’s still being treated as LCW under Reg 30 means he implicitly does not have LCWRA. Very clever argument. Good luck.
Thought you might be interested in this response to my clients MP.
Just in case you’ve missed it, your client’s name is clearly stated and visible in the letter. It is also possible to make it our even where redacted.
Damn, if i’d bothered to read this post properly at the time…
Just had a call from the JC+ because this letter had been bought to their attention. I’d completely missed it hadn’t been blanked out properly.
Lesson learnt.
Is there any chance of seeing the redacted response/responses! Thanks JM