ESA Appeal - Time Scale

Chorlie

sunnyone wrote: »

I honestly cant see why you believe you should be in the SG, you are a manual wheelchair user who can mobilise in the chair, yes you should still get the 9 points for steps but you dont fulfil any of the SG specific criteria, can you post which one you think you fulfil?

That was just an example as to if the old descriptor apply at review time it's unfair to someone who is trying to apply now for it under the new descriptors and therefore won't get it.

As it happens I am manual wheelchair user, but have many other issues and all of this was considered when I applied for ESA and being placed in the WRAG, but I feel if the new descriptors where used I should be in the SG. It wasn't just the fact I'm in a wheelchair.

sunnyone

Chorlie wrote: »

That was just an example as to if the old descriptor apply at review time it's unfair to someone who is trying to apply now for it under the new descriptors and therefore won't get it.

As it happens I am manual wheelchair user, but have many other issues and all of this was considered when I applied for ESA and being placed in the WRAG, but I feel if the new descriptors where used I should be in the SG. It wasn't just the fact I'm in a wheelchair.

Its not points that get you into the support group but specific markers, I should get in the SG because Im a fulltime wheelie who can self propel and I should also get a shed loads of other points but the 100 points wont get me into the support group, not being able to mobilise should.

Chorlie

sunnyone wrote: »

Its not points that get you into the support group but specific markers, I should get in the SG because Im a fulltime wheelie who can self propel and I should also get a shed loads of other points but the 100 points wont get me into the support group, not being able to mobilise should.

Yes I'm fully aware of this and it is a specific marker within the new descriptors that I'm appealing.

I think you're reading to much into the wheelchair side of my disability.
Mobility isn't the descriptor I'm appealing.

My question was how long before I hear anything after appealing, which was answered in the first couple of posts. The thread changed direction a little to if you can appeal under the new descriptors if the award was given using the old descriptors and this is what we're trying to clarify.

Cpt.Scarlet

Chorlie wrote: »

If the above comments are true, that it's the old descriptors that apply if awarded ESA before April 2011, than someone who is in a manual wheelchair and can push it themselves, would get 15 points on the old descriptors since they can't walk, but would only get 9 points under the new descriptors since they can push the chair but can't get up 2 steps. So each time they get reviewed for ESA they would keep it since they were awarded it before April 2011, but someone with the same disability who applies for it now won't get it since they only get 9 points......I would of thought a review was to see if they were still entitled to ESA & if so which Group to place them in and to do this they would use the current rules on ESA to decide this; but it's seems I incorrect in thinking this.

You can't mix and match descriptors, there is only one set of tests currently in use, those introduced on 28/03/11, see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/228/made/data.pdf

So using your example, you would score 0 points for mobilising on the assumption that you can't walk 50m but can propel a wheelchair more than 200m and 0 points for the steps as this test no longer exists.

Cpt.Scarlet

Chorlie wrote: »

That was just an example as to if the old descriptor apply at review time it's unfair to someone who is trying to apply now for it under the new descriptors and therefore won't get it.

As it happens I am manual wheelchair user, but have many other issues and all of this was considered when I applied for ESA and being placed in the WRAG, but I feel if the new descriptors where used I should be in the SG. It wasn't just the fact I'm in a wheelchair.

Given that four tests have been removed and all of the remaining ones have been made more restrictive, anybody being assessed, or re-assessed is going to find it harder to score points. That was the intention.

Why do you keep saying "if the new descriptors were used" when you have already identified that they were used. You're now saying your medical was held using the new descriptors, so any appeal you lodge has to be based on the new descriptors, the old ones are completely irrelevant to your case and cannot be referenced.

Chorlie

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

You can't mix and match descriptors, there is only one set of tests currently in use, those introduced on 28/03/11, see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/228/made/data.pdf

So using your example, you would score 0 points for mobilising on the assumption that you can't walk 50m but can propel a wheelchair more than 200m and 0 points for the steps as this test no longer exists.

Part B of Activity 1 (Mobility) - 'Unable to mount or descend 2 steps unaided even with use of a handrail' - 9 points

Therefore a manual wheelchair user would get 9 points for this, unless they were very clever and can climb steps in there chair

Chorlie

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

Given that four tests have been removed and all of the remaining ones have been made more restrictive, anybody being assessed, or re-assessed is going to find it harder to score points. That was the intention.

Why do you keep saying "if the new descriptors were used" when you have already identified that they were used. You're now saying your medical was held using the new descriptors, so any appeal you lodge has to be based on the new descriptors, the old ones are completely irrelevant to your case and cannot be referenced.

Others on this thread have stated that if the old descriptors were used in the medical then these were used in the review and my appeal will fail if I'm basing my appeal on the new descriptors.

I put in an appeal because I thought the decision was wrong and I've explained in my appeal why I think this. All I was asking was how long it normally takes to hear back from the DWP regarding a decision of an appeal. Whether the appeal fails or not is up to the DWP and if it fails it's up to me where I go from there.

Cpt.Scarlet

Chorlie wrote: »

Part B of Activity 1 (Mobility) - 'Unable to mount or descend 2 steps unaided even with use of a handrail' - 9 points

Therefore a manual wheelchair user would get 9 points for this, unless they were very clever and can climb steps in there chair

You are perfectly correct, my apologies.

Muttleythefrog

Chorlie wrote: »

I would of thought a review was to see if they were still entitled to ESA & if so which Group to place them in and to do this they would use the current rules on ESA to decide this; but it's seems I incorrect in thinking this.

Sorry I added to confusion as I'd misunderstood what NASA said, partly because of the awkward timing of your latest WCA and the changes. If ESA50 form related to new descriptors then I think you can safely assume new descriptors applied regarding your WCA of June/July 2011... I would presume their statement of reasons should confirm this.. and any medical report. So appeal probably does have basis.

Chorlie

Just an update on my Appeal...

I have today received a letter advising of a change in my ESA, a decision on my capability for work means that I've been move from the Work Related Activity Group to the Support Group...

No Tribunal, No Medical and No Extra Evidence (other than the A4 letter I included with the GL24 form).

A Happy Chorlie...