Tribunal about my ESA

Garry_Anderson

jimmo wrote: »

The way I like to think of it is that in British justice the accused is innocent until proved guilty. When you go to a tribunal you are appealing against a decision made by a Decision Maker. In other words you are accusing the Decision Maker of getting it wrong. So the Decision Maker is innocent unless you prove him to be guilty.

I went through the tribunal - it is biased against claimant - as is the whole benefits system - here is what I wrote to DWP regarding this exact same point:

Concerning Adjudication Officers Guide. The burden of proof 03027.2. Where benefit has been awarded, the burden then shifts to the AO. (a) As I already had this benefit, do you accept that it should be your responsibility? (b) Why then has your submission put me as appellant, having to prove my claim, having to defend myself against your libellous statements?

NASA_2

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

I went through the tribunal - it is biased against claimant - as is the whole benefits system.....

That must be why billions are paid out on benefits and why the welfare state is dragging the UK down.

Garry_Anderson

NASA wrote: »

That must be why billions are paid out on benefits and why the welfare state is dragging the UK down.

Why then do claimants who already had IB going through tribunal have to prove their case and not the other way around like the rules state?

NASA_2

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

Why then do claimants who already had IB going through tribunal have to prove their case and not the other way around like the rules state?

I'm not bothered about that in the slightest to be honest so I dont really have a concrete view.

All I will point out is that you posted something copied and pasted from a 'guide' and a 'guide' is not the same as a legislative requirement. Guides try to interpret law to make decision making more consistent but a decision that is at variance with a guide isnt necessarily at variance with the law itself.

So what was your answer from the DWP?

Garry_Anderson

"I'm not bothered about that in the slightest to be honest so I dont really have a concrete view."

The rules state they have to answer within set time limit - they did not - so the DWP have much the same attitude as yourself.

This is merely a couple of examples of how the law is being violated within the system.

There are obviously many other examples e.g. they could even use their biased opinions as actual evidence - against the old and sick, something that the police can not do with known rapists or kiddy fiddlers.

NASA_2

From DWP appeals to kiddy fiddling - nice way of setting context Gary.

Garry_Anderson

NASA wrote: »

From DWP appeals to kiddy fiddling - nice way of setting context Gary.

Merely showing the difference in the way authorities treat old and sick claimants to the way they treat criminals.

i.e. Criminals are treated with more respect than those out of work through no fault of their own.

healy

Please note that appeal tribunals are not biased against the claimant.

The majority of appeals are fair and people usually get the correct outcome.

An appeal is a complete re-hearing of the case and it is independent of the DWP.

I would not like people to be worried unduly by problems that the minority may have which would be far more likely to appear on a board like this.

System

I suppose we rarely hear about the good outcomes (if there are any) so its easy to assume all with go wrong. Personally i have a feeling its going to be very stressful, as i suffer from mental illness and just looking at the whole ESA thing reinforces my paranoia that they will try to catch me out and make out i'm lying (that's if the whole figures of 9 out of 10 people failing medicals is to be believed)

nogginthenog

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

"I'm not bothered about that in the slightest to be honest so I dont really have a concrete view."

The rules state they have to answer within set time limit - they did not - so the DWP have much the same attitude as yourself.

This is merely a couple of examples of how the law is being violated within the system.

There are obviously many other examples e.g. they could even use their biased opinions as actual evidence - against the old and sick, something that the police can not do with known rapists or kiddy fiddlers.

I must admit i would like the provision of the initial ESA medical to be AUTOMATICALY taped just like police intreviews, and also criminals have legal representation with the power to intervene during interviews, which i would also like to see implemented into ESA medicals.