Statement of reasons and points of law

celinepatricia

dmg24 wrote: »

Shame on me for correcting you when you give out incorrect information? The reason you have to fight is because you are dealing with something that you do not understand, but you refuse to accept that you are wrong.

Explain where I am wrong because I have to fight for my husband to get the benefits that he is entitled to as he is terminally ill! Me , thinking that if that happens to you and you have worked all your life, expect that the government who have taken income tax and national insurance off you for over thirty years would have to fight to get a pittance from them. What am I doing wrong, what am I not understanding.. If you are so clever please explain where I am going wrong as you say I am not understanding anything.

celinepatricia

Jock 221 is happy for me to be on this thread or he would have asked me to leave.

celinepatricia

dmg24 wrote: »

Ignore her sh1305, all cp seems to want to do is distract other peoples threads (and you are, of course, correct).

yes sh1305 he should have been in the support group from the start, that is the point that I am making. He scored zero points at medical which he shouldnt even have had to go to and is now, because I have fought for him, still in the wrong group. Being advised to ignore me is a terrible thing to say to somebody who is worried sick about how we are going to manage financially, without the worry of what is going to happen when the medication that my husband is on stops working.

Indie_Kid

celinepatricia wrote: »

yes sh1305 he should have been in the support group from the start, that is the point that I am making. He scored zero points at medical which he shouldnt even have had to go to and is now, because I have fought for him, still in the wrong group. Being advised to ignore me is a terrible thing to say to somebody who is worried sick about how we are going to manage financially, without the worry of what is going to happen when the medication that my husband is on stops working.

There is a letter (D something) that he should've been given by his GP. Did he get that?

Jock221

dmg24 wrote: »

Here are some recent cases, you will see that some challenges are based perceived procedural irregularities, and some on the Tribunal's interpretation of the word of the law.

Thanks for that link there are some useful cases listed I will read up on
them and see if I can find anything that relates to my case

davsidipp

jock221 you have just stated your appeal reason under 'law'. non supply of statement of reason.just write to upper tribunal stating the reason unreasonable length of time.

dmg24

davsidipp wrote: »

jock221 you have just stated your appeal reason under 'law'. non supply of statement of reason.just write to upper tribunal stating the reason unreasonable length of time.

How long has the OP been waiting for his report? What law would that be in contravention of?

cit_k

dmg24 wrote: »

They did not back the doctor, they decided that the evidence of the DWP was more believable than yours. You need to prove that the Tribunal erred in their application of the law, challenging the facts of the case is not relevant here.

Im not sure where I read it, I will try in the next couple of days to find it again, but I am sure I read some case law about tribunals relying on ATOS evidence over third party evidence, and that it was not right for them to automatically do so without very good reasons (or something similar to that, I would have to find the actual document before you could safely use a point like that though).

sh1305 wrote: »

How does an MRI scan prove care and /or mobility needs?

Care and mobility needs are not in dispute, this is a appeal for IB, which is simply about if a person can work or not.

Jock221 wrote: »

Yes you are probably right and I know people who can lie through their teeth at these medicals and get through then have a laugh about it later it makes me really angry.

Have you ever thought they may just be lying, in order to cover up a more serious issue?
If its so easy, how come you did not pass...

cit_k

celinepatricia wrote: »

You go to appeal before tribunal. The way it works is submit application and go for medical , answer ESA refused. You can ask for reconsideration or go straight for appeal, if esa is still is refused you go to tribunal

Obviously in our case, we actually got somebody with some braincells who thought when they recieved our appeal papers, this person is really ill, why are we making him go to tribunal?

Launching an appeal leads to an automatic reconsideration.
Well in theory anyway, evidence shows many decision makers are reluctant to reconsider anything unless new evidence comes to light.

cit_k

To o/p when did you lose the tribunal, and when did you request the statement of reasons?

It can take a long time to get things like this sorted..

When appealing IB your choices used to be to either claim reduced rate income support or JSA.

I think I am correct on the following points, someone point out if I am wrong, if you were turned down for benefits more than 6 months ago, or your condition has deteriorated you should now be able to put in a claim for ESA, and that claim can run whilst your tribunal for IB is being sorted out.

You will find, if you had been claiming reduced rate income support, the DWP would stop paying you until you have been granted leave to appeal.

I strongly suggest, as was already mentioned, that you get professional help from a welfare rights worker, as these things are very complicated, and can also have ramifications on other claimaints due to case law decisions if it gets that far.

I have been in the same position, I requested first of all that the tribunal be set aside (due to my rep not turning up) but they refused that.
Then I requested a statement of reasons.
Eventually (these things do take a very long time) that turned up.
Welfare rights drafted up a reply, and that went back to the tribunal service as a request for leave to appeal against the decision of the tribunal.

As that decision is made by the first tribunal themselves, they as you tend to expect, eventually said no, permission denied.
I then had to request again to the upper tribunal.

Eventually, they get in touch with the secretary of state with their response and ask for a response form the state.

Eventually, it has been agreed mistakes were made,and its gone back to the upper tribunal where a judge will either decide then and there or request a new tribunal.

The whole process has been ongoing for about 2 years or so now, and still waiting.