DLA tribunal

annies_mum

Hi, could anyone give me any help?
i presently have a appeal going through for my son, as yet we haven't got a tribunal date for the hearing. Since the original claim a year ago his condition has got worse and understandably they won't be able to consider new evidence as they say this applies to his deterioated condition. Can i run a change of circumnstances claim in tandem with his appeal or would it be best to drop the appeal and just go for change of circumstances? hope this makes sense

thanks for taking the time to read this

TOBRUK

From what I understand from your post; You have made an appeal a year ago for your son's DLA claim and still awaiting a date for the hearing. Have you contacted the DLA office to enquire about the possible date for the hearing?

If you did drop the appeal you would potentially lose a years' back payment if you win the appeal. Obviously at the tribunal they will not take into consideration any deterioration of your sons' condition - as they only make a decision on the case on the original application. If you did win the case I suppose you could then notify of change of condition - bearing in mind that this could mean losing your DLA completely or a changing of the rate on care or mobility.

I am not sure if I am correct but I think I have read sometime on this forum about someone making a new claim at the same time of disputing their current claim - I'm not sure if this is actually possible or even advisable.

Why don't you call the DLA office and explain that you are awaiting a date for tribunal but your son's condition has worsened and what would they advise?

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

I often wonder if it's worth not botheirng with an appeal and just re-apply afresh. Saves waiting for an appeal.

Also the Benefits and Work help guides for DLA and ESA are invaluable sources to help get the form right first time.

annies_mum

Many thanks for both your replies. it has taken so long to finally come to tribunal as he was turned down flat initially last march, then we asked for reconsideration and he was awarded low rate care, we didn't agree with this so asked for reconsideration again award remained at low rate care.
we then decided to just go straight to appeal but we were told too much time had lapsed, i knew it hadn't so then had to appeal against this, this then went to tribunal and we won the right to appeal. hence the reason 12 months have passed.
The back pay really isn't important but my ex husband who my son lives with, has had to go back to work fulltime under the new ruling for IS and lone parents of children aged 10.
This isn't working out as my son is very violent and needs constant care so we need to get a med/high rate award in order to enable his dad to stay at home. i rang today to ask if we have a tribunal date yet but was told no date was set yet.
we are in a very fortunate position that his hospital consultant has agreed to be our representative at the hearing. its just the wait now

sardine

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

I often wonder if it's worth not botheirng with an appeal and just re-apply afresh. Saves waiting for an appeal.

Also the Benefits and Work help guides for DLA and ESA are invaluable sources to help get the form right first time.

I think I would go along with that point of view. Because it is taking so long now to get to the Tribunal (12 months now in most places is not unusual), you are not receiving any financial award. However by not appealing you used to be able to put in a fresh claim and hopfully receive a 'Yes' on the application without the need for an appeal.

However (according to the DLA help line) two things do affect this.

1. Any new claim made within a period of 6 months of being refused for another claim will be treated as the same claim as the old one. Same evidence they used to fail the old one, + you would have to convince them that there was a deterioration.

2. Explain why if you are using the same problems re care & mobility as an excuse to make a similar claim instead of appealing. By not appealing they will see it as that you are agreeing that they were right to throw the first claim out.

The only way you can avoid this linking (according to them) is to delay any new claim until after the 6 month anniversary of receiving the letter of failure for the first.

I am in the same position. I didn't see the point in appealing, thinking that it would be quicker to put in a fresh claim and start again from zero.
After what they told me and it now being too late to appeal the first claim, I am having to wait until after the end of August before I can put in a new claim and it not be linked to the other one. A bit unfair, but that is how it is.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

sardine wrote: »

I think I would go along with that point of view. Because it is taking so long now to get to the Tribunal (12 months now in most places is not unusual), you are not receiving any financial award. However by not appealing you used to be able to put in a fresh claim and hopfully receive a 'Yes' on the application without the need for an appeal.

However (according to the DLA help line) two things do affect this.

1. Any new claim made within a period of 6 months of being refused for another claim will be treated as the same claim as the old one. Same evidence they used to fail the old one, + you would have to convince them that there was a deterioration.

2. Explain why if you are using the same problems re care & mobility as an excuse to make a similar claim instead of appealing. By not appealing they will see it as that you are agreeing that they were right to throw the first claim out.

The only way you can avoid this linking (according to them) is to delay any new claim until after the 6 month anniversary of receiving the letter of failure for the first.

I am in the same position. I didn't see the point in appealing, thinking that it would be quicker to put in a fresh claim and start again from zero.
After what they told me and it now being too late to appeal the first claim, I am having to wait until after the end of August before I can put in a new claim and it not be linked to the other one. A bit unfair, but that is how it is.

Have you seen the Benefits and Work guidance booklets on claiming DLA? Many people who were turned down for DLA have had successful re-applications using these guides.

I know somone who was in this position. First claim was rejeted. They waited like you. Second claim with help from the guides got them Higher Rate Mobility and Middle Rate Care. No medical and awarded for 5 years.

sardine

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

Have you seen the Benefits and Work guidance booklets on claiming DLA? Many people who were turned down for DLA have had successful re-applications using these guides.

I know somone who was in this position. First claim was rejeted. They waited like you. Second claim with help from the guides got them Higher Rate Mobility and Middle Rate Care. No medical and awarded for 5 years.

No I haven't to be honest. Isn't that a site that charges a fee?
That person was very very lucky indeed! Maybe they had irrefutable evidence from their GP? Not everybody is able to obtain that.
Some GP's are prepared only to indicate what the diagnosis is, whilst other GP's don't have the faintest of a clue how the disability affects their every day life because not everybody goes with a long list of 'can't do' items to them. They just see the GP as and when they have to for medication, blood tests etc.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

sardine wrote: »

No I haven't to be honest. Isn't that a site that charges a fee?
That person was very very lucky indeed! Maybe they had irrefutable evidence from their GP? Not everybody is able to obtain that.
Some GP's are prepared only to indicate what the diagnosis is, whilst other GP's don't have the faintest of a clue how the disability affects their every day life because not everybody goes with a long list of 'can't do' items to them. They just see the GP as and when they have to for medication, blood tests etc.

The person has M.E. You do have to pay for the site. Think it is £18 but from her point of view it was well worth the outlay.

Her GP was written to for a factual report but she gave the GP a copy of the DLA form for him to view as well.

sardine

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

The person has M.E. You do have to pay for the site. Think it is £18 but from her point of view it was well worth the outlay.

Her GP was written to for a factual report but she gave the GP a copy of the DLA form for him to view as well.

I see, but to some or I should say quite a few, £18 is a large sum of money, especially as the information is available FOC from the DWP and other souces. But each to their own I suppose.

As I was saying, your friend went to the GP with the DLA form that she had completed. Some people just send the form in and hope that the GP will do his/her bit at the end when asked. This isn't likely if they know nothing about the probems that the claimant has.

I do seriously worry that there are people out there that can't afford the £18, find it difficult to fill in the DLA form, can't access help with it due to reduced funding and don't complain to the GP enough to get a part decent report.
The system is failing them.

Still, it must work for those who are borderline cases, that know how the system works and know how these forms should be completed, and how to play the game with the GP by constantly visiting, complaining about every twinge knowing that it is all making up the detail for the GP to give a full and detailed report. I know quite a few, no doubt most of you do.

If people know how to play the game but choose not to, then I suppose they do really deserve to get nothing.

As regards the OP, if they are assessed as needing this level of support, then they are entitled to it.

daska

sardine wrote: »

I see, but to some or I should say quite a few, £18 is a large sum of money, especially as the information is available FOC from the DWP and other souces. But each to their own I suppose.

As I was saying, your friend went to the GP with the DLA form that she had completed. Some people just send the form in and hope that the GP will do his/her bit at the end when asked. This isn't likely if they know nothing about the probems that the claimant has.

I do seriously worry that there are people out there that can't afford the £18, find it difficult to fill in the DLA form, can't access help with it due to reduced funding and don't complain to the GP enough to get a part decent report.
The system is failing them.

Still, it must work for those who are borderline cases, that know how the system works and know how these forms should be completed, and how to play the game with the GP by constantly visiting, complaining about every twinge knowing that it is all making up the detail for the GP to give a full and detailed report. I know quite a few, no doubt most of you do.

If people know how to play the game but choose not to, then I suppose they do really deserve to get nothing.

As regards the OP, if they are assessed as needing this level of support, then they are entitled to it.

I did my first DLA application on my own and got awarded HRM/MRC. I'm not sure how, I think it must have relied heavily on my GP's report, having been pregnant as well I'd been seeing her very frequently. But then they changed the form and it was scary so I searched out what help I could and the only thing that made it 'easy' was B&W. Yes the info is there if you can find it but the examples given by B&W make it much clearer as to what type / level of info is needed and what sort of things you might consider yourself 'coping' with when actually it's just that you've learned to 'accept' that you can't do them. If your medical professionals are telling you to apply then an initial outlay of £18 is minimal given the potential difference it can made to your life. Ironically the only DLA application I have had to have a medical for was the one done by a support worker.

Making sure your GP is fully in the picture is isn't really a case of 'playing the game' for benefit applications, most of us are not fully qualified to judge which symptoms/problems are relevant to diagnosis or referrals (physio, OT etc). If you don't tell your GP everything then you are not giving them the tools they need to do their job.

But overall yes, I agree with you, the system is failing those who don't have the ability or finances to complete the application unaided.

sardine

daska wrote: »

IMaking sure your GP is fully in the picture is isn't really a case of 'playing the game' for benefit applications, most of us are not fully qualified to judge which symptoms/problems are relevant to diagnosis or referrals (physio, OT etc). If you don't tell your GP everything then you are not giving them the tools they need to do their job.

But overall yes, I agree with you, the system is failing those who don't have the ability or finances to complete the application unaided.

Of course you have to tell your GP if you are having pains in your chest for example. You, they, want to get to the bottom of the matter.

I was referring (not very well I admit) to those people that already have a disability, know what is wrong and know how the illness fits in with the symptoms. Take for example a simple thing of Type 1 diabetes. Everyone knows that one of the side effects can be loss of consciousness due to low blood sugar. Do you bother to tell your GP every time that happens 2, 3 times a week)? Why? You know exactly what it is and how it can be rectified. The GP can't do anything more for you, that you can't do for yourself.
However, if it isn't reported how can the GP confirm that his/her patient regularly collapses due to not being in control of their own medication.
With the same disease, most know that another side effect is the inability to use your legs at times/burning feet etc. (no mobility) This is unfortunately one of those things with diabetes. There is no point in telling your GP, they can't do anything other than to tell you to check your blood sugar level more often and watch your diet.

If everyone that has Type 1 diabetes went to their GP with every little problem, there wouldn't be enough time for the GP to see all of their other patients.

BUT, by not going, the GP can only say that the patient is in full control and that there are no adverse problems regarding care or mobility.

That's the game!!

Finally, how do we reach out to these vulnerable members of the population to make sure that THEY receive their full entitlement?
I don't know, but it damn well gets me annoyed when I see them struggling to cope.