2011 IIDB ‘renewal’ resulted in 2004 decision being superseded….... case of error or mistake by DWP?

Historically this case originated in 1995 with the initial claim. Between then and 2002 there were three renewals all of which continued the award at the 40% rate. the claim was based purely on a mental health issue.

In January 2004 a further renewal was submitted and a ‘medical assessment’ was undertaken on the 5th February 2004.
On 21st February 2004 the client was admitted via A&E into hospital with a life threatening physical condition.
In April 2004 the client was discharged.
On 25th June 2004 the client wrote to the DWP asking for a decision on the renewal and requested copies of all of his file from the DWP (IIDB) department.
In July 2004 the client was re-admitted into hospital.
From July 2004 until April 2011 the client was both physically and mentally unable to attend to any of his affairs due to continued long term illness and continual hospital admissions. His daughter had access to his bank account and ensured that his normal household expenses were met.

In May 2011 the client once again contacted the DWP requesting a copy of his file and asking the reason why he had still not heard about the 2004 renewal.

In June 2011 the client received the papers but still no explanation was given as regards the ‘missing’ decision notice.

This is when I became involved.

After examining the copy file I noted that:
The client’s letter dated 25th June 2004 had been received but appeared not to have been replied to.
The file disclosed a copy of the decision notice that had actually been issued on the 9th June 2004, but unfortunately to an address that the client had previously lived at. (despite there being evidence in the file that the DWP were aware of the ‘new’ address 12 months earlier!). The decision was to refuse the claim.
Also in the file there contained the ‘medical assessor’s’ report as well as a positive report from the client’s psychiatrist.

The client completed a ‘change of circumstances’ claim for the IIDB in June 2011.

Following a ‘medical assessment’ that application was refused. The ‘medical report’ concluded that nothing had changed since the 2004 report.

An appeal was lodged and evidence that was available in 2004 was submitted to prove that the 2004 decision was wrong. Additionally, evidence was submitted that proved that from 2004 to 2011 the client not only continued to be eligible for IIDB but also that he was not fit enough to have been able to deal with his affairs.

The result was that in September 2011 a decision was reached that IIDB at the 40% rate was to be awarded from February 2004 until February 2014.

My problem is attempting to secure a back dated payment/compensation in respect of the period February 2004 to March 2011.

1. The client never received a reply to his letter dated 25th June 2004 - “Could you please let me have a copy of my file and computer information held relating to my claim for IIDB. The reason why I need this information is to see if I need to appeal against the decision for which I have not yet received”

2. The client has never received the decision notice appertaining to the 2004 renewal - he has has seen a copy of it, sent to the wrong address, when he received a copy of his file in June 2011.

3. The 2004 ‘medical assessment’ was flawed. (a) it was totally medically inaccurate, and there was no evidence that the assessor had that would have given rise to that ‘opinion’. In fact there was a report from the client’s psychiatrist that contradicted the ATOS assessor, yet that report was never used by ATOS or the DWP. The DWP DM based the decision on the ATOS report soley.

Obviously we are out of time for a ‘late’ appeal - 8 years!, but given the circumstances I feel that the client given his health situation, the unanswered letter and the medically inaccurate ATOS report, he should be entitled to be compensated for his losses.

Any advice on how to proceed would be most welcome. I am considering putting the matter to the local MP as justice has not been done or seen to be done.

Many thanks for the directions.

I will do as you suggest.