benefits tribunal help

christine_chris_chrissy

Vixie_Pixie wrote: »

thats naughty!

they cannot just take the word of a malicious statement - they would have to have other evidence of that!

my boyfriend was getting grief from the LA because of his untidy garden & the amount of classic cars at his property & working on cars etc
He mentioned this to my neighbours not the spitefull ones & they said bring them round here not a problem so he did they rent from HA but I know the owner because he lived next door for a short time I spoke to him & asked if he minded & he said no not at all not if it makes it look like some one is there when they are not home helps with security.I had sold one of my cars & boyfriend had sold a couple of his to try to keep the peace one of them sold on ebay & the people came & paid but didn't collect the car for sevaral weeks during that time the spitefull neighbour took photos & complained to LA they came & run the no.plates through dvla & said numerous vehicles reg to myself & my boyfriend,seen at my propery!

incubus72

healy wrote: »

Tribunals are not aimed against the appellant, they are complete re-hearing of the case and are independent as far as IS/IB/ESA/DLA etc appeals go. It would not be acceptable to a tribunal if the DWP twisted the truth.

Have to disagree with you a bit here. I went to a tribunal due to failing my medical with the social,during the medical when my peak flow readings were taken they were 210,230 and 240,the social's doctor put this down as having "mild" asthma. I consulted my chest specialist who laughed at this as it actually qualifies me as having Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. I appealed against the decision and went to tribunal where I had 2 heart and lung specialists appear on my behalf. Amazingly the tribunal managed to find in favour of the social even though it was clear that their doctor was both incompotent and a blatant liar so yes the DWP do twist the truth and do get away with it.

christine_chris_chrissy

They really presurised me during interview to give them answers they wanted it was horrible,I felt like I was having words put in my mouth I didn't really know what they were trying to imply.

leemack

incubus72 wrote: »

Have to disagree with you a bit here. I went to a tribunal due to failing my medical with the social,during the medical when my peak flow readings were taken they were 210,230 and 240,the social's doctor put this down as having "mild" asthma. I consulted my chest specialist who laughed at this as it actually qualifies me as having Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. I appealed against the decision and went to tribunal where I had 2 heart and lung specialists appear on my behalf. Amazingly the tribunal managed to find in favour of the social even though it was clear that their doctor was both incompotent and a blatant liar so yes the DWP do twist the truth and do get away with it.

Sometimes tribunals get it wrong, that's true. Its why cases go further to social security commissioners. ESA/INCAP appeals are particularly difficult to win.

Don't know the specifics of your case, but where ESA/INCAP/DLA are concerened diagnosis doesn't hold a lot of weight except to confirm that you have a medical condition. They look at specific criteria and for ESA/INCAP score you points for criteria that you satisfy, and its really really hard to prove someone satisfies the criteria (and I've tried!!). I was told by a colleague that only 5% of ESA appeals are successful at the moment.

christine_chris_chrissy

I think once they have the new computers up & running these people will be back on the system getting what they are entittled to under another name,the gov have to reduce statistics shuffling everything around is what they seem to do.Turning peoples lives upside down with out a care in the world.
I used to get rushed out of the job centre when I went for my comp interviews I had to say hang on I have only just got here! they had to get through the back log!
when I had meeting with some scheme they were running I was shocked at what I was being told about statistics,very un professional

healy

incubus72 wrote: »

Have to disagree with you a bit here. I went to a tribunal due to failing my medical with the social,during the medical when my peak flow readings were taken they were 210,230 and 240,the social's doctor put this down as having "mild" asthma. I consulted my chest specialist who laughed at this as it actually qualifies me as having Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. I appealed against the decision and went to tribunal where I had 2 heart and lung specialists appear on my behalf. Amazingly the tribunal managed to find in favour of the social even though it was clear that their doctor was both incompotent and a blatant liar so yes the DWP do twist the truth and do get away with it.

Like anything tribunals are not perfect so you should have taken it further as leemack has said. Most people have a fair hearing.

unemployedJCP

Without wanting to start an argument.. I think most people who have had to attend an Appeal Tribunal where they are arguing against what the DWP etc. have stated, get an unfair hearing.

For example, a fair hearing is one where both parties get the opportunity to state their case similar to court with an Claimant and a Defendant. However, incidently, DWP hasn't taken an representative with them so this can't happen. To fill up time the appellant is asked unrelated personal questionson background etc.

Typically what happens is the Appeal Tribunal (especially for JSA etc.) awards a partial appeal (surely the appellant or the respondent is right, they both cant be) - basically negotiating the amount down - if this happens you need to hold it out and appeal to the Upper Tribunal. For disability cases it is extremely difficult to win.

An attitude of it not being perfect isn't adequate - the Tribunals are meant to bring justice, having an unfair Appeal Tribunal service as some may be is just a way of reducing the cost to the Government.

As incubus stated, at Appeal Tribunals the judges with no specific medical background (hence the specialist involved in the cases) seems to favour the DWP although were outnumbered by specialists. Obviously the DWP doctor is biased and lies.

There is alot of talk about ATOS (?) and the DWP with some point scoring system failing genuine disabled persons ability to claim benefit. DWP doesn't stop there - deciding to end benefits to those going through cancer treatment if they can't make an appointment. List goes on...

healy

unemployedJCP wrote: »

Without wanting to start an argument.. I think most people who have had to attend an Appeal Tribunal where they are arguing against what the DWP etc. have stated, get an unfair hearing.

For example, a fair hearing is one where both parties get the opportunity to state their case similar to court with an Claimant and a Defendant. However, incidently, DWP hasn't taken an representative with them so this can't happen. To fill up time the appellant is asked unrelated personal questionson background etc.

Typically what happens is the Appeal Tribunal (especially for JSA etc.) awards a partial appeal (surely the appellant or the respondent is right, they both cant be) - basically negotiating the amount down - if this happens you need to hold it out and appeal to the Upper Tribunal. For disability cases it is extremely difficult to win.

An attitude of it not being perfect isn't adequate - the Tribunals are meant to bring justice, having an unfair Appeal Tribunal service as some may be is just a way of reducing the cost to the Government.

As incubus stated, at Appeal Tribunals the judges with no specific medical background (hence the specialist involved in the cases) seems to favour the DWP although were outnumbered by specialists. Obviously the DWP doctor is biased and lies.

There is alot of talk about ATOS (?) and the DWP with some point scoring system failing genuine disabled persons ability to claim benefit. DWP doesn't stop there - deciding to end benefits to those going through cancer treatment if they can't make an appointment. List goes on...

The majority of people attending a tribunal do get a fair hearing, those that have attended many tribunals will know I am correct.

The last thing the tribunals do is "fill time", they do not have this luxury and they do not ask unrelated questions.

A partial success is only possible for certain benefits and is within the regulations. You can only appeal to the upper tribunal if there has been an error in law.

The appeals are not unfair and the judges do not favour the DWP, they are independent.

alwaysonthego_2

Board guide comment

Please can this be kept on topic, if you wish to discuss further ATOS please take it to the discussion board, thanks.

christine_chris_chrissy

I am worried as I have a huge file, will we have enough time to go through my file