Taped Interview Under Caution

WhiteHorse

airborne_61 wrote: »

I would get some one to go with him take all documents relating to his condition. If interview is taped ask for a copy and a transcript of the interview.

Better still, tape them without their knowledge. That way, when their account of the interview turns out to be heavily doctored, you can smash them.

incorrect_2

Thanks to everyone its nice to know there are people out there who try to help when people are feeling very low.

fogartyblue.

incorrect wrote: »

Thanks for the reply but, I am feeling sick with worry for him as he does not cope with things very well and the way the letter is worded is awful. He suffers from systemic scleroderma and syncope plus arthritis. He has always worked and always tried to get on with his life but his mobility is restricted and he suffers terrible pain. Should he take someone with him to this interview or supporting letters from doctors etc?

What type of job does he have?

incorrect_2

He has an office job, answers the phone works on computer. The employers have made allowances for his condition at work to help him get up from his desk etc.

rogerblack

Going unrepresented, and 'just telling the truth' can lead to problems, as the people doing the investigation may have poor understanding of the legal tests that you need to pass to get DLA, and may accidentally, or on purpose mislead.

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewreply/10214/ - contains some commentary on issues that can arise with an unrepresented claimant.

I would start out by pointing your son at http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/dmgch61.pdf - specifically the diagram on page 50 to begin.
This is an overview of the routes to HRM.

Then go back and read from page 37 on.

It is a long document, but it's the guidance the decisionmakers are supposed to use, and fortunately, most of it is bits that are irrelevant, such as rules about how blindness is assessed.

This will give a good understanding as to how DLA is supposed to be assessed.

It's also important to understand what is not relevant.

61306 - 'any walking with severe discomfort is ignored'.

So, that he can (for example) walk 80m with severe discomfort does not mean he can be treated as being able to walk 80m.

Copies of letters from doctors, or from work may be useful.

And I would agree that covertly recording this is a good plan.

As I understand it, you can attend and be with him during the interview, but you cannot interrupt or comment in any way.

Elvisia

You can also just turn up to your CAB, but it depends on how many people there are already waiting there. I am so sorry you're going through this. I suspect you're not going to know what it's all about until the meeting. You might well find something is flagging up on his file, which can be easily explained or adjusted. If he hasn't done anything wrong (worked too many hours, claimed for the wrong thing knowingly) then really there's nothing they can do. I am surprised he didn't have a compliance meeting first.

Elvisia

I agree with the great Rogerblack above, he always knows his stuff. tell your son to listen to the questions, think about what he says then answer. It's too easy to get panicked and answer something else and end up in a muddle. And try to be calm yourself, as that will no doubt make him even more nervous! Go and find out what it's about then come back fighting with a Plan B.

incorrect_2

He has had nothing prior to this and he works full time which he is allowed to do and they already know about so it cant be that. Rogerblack I will show him your post and the link you provided. I suspect he will not rest now until next thursday morning.

real1314

WhiteHorse wrote: »

Better still, tape them without their knowledge. That way, when their account of the interview turns out to be heavily doctored, you can smash them.

You have evidence of this? Or is it just another fantasy with which you cause people unnecessary alarm?

Don't bother responding, because it's the latter. They use official dual-tape machines, just like on The Bill. The is no way for them to "doctor" the tape. :cool:

WhiteHorse

real1314 wrote: »

You have evidence of this?

Been there, done it. More than once, too. I have been the cause of more than one nasty little jack-in-office finding that their career prospects have suffered a sudden and irreversible setback.

Or is it just another fantasy with which you cause people unnecessary alarm?

Not ... a conspiracy?

Don't bother responding, because it's the latter.

Life is full of disappointments.

They use official dual-tape machines, just like on The Bill. The is no way for them to "doctor" the tape.

The reference was not to doctoring the tape itself, but to the supposed transcript.

It is a common technique, used by government agencies the world over. Follow up letters often state that 'admissions' were made when they were not. They rely on people not having the means to refute their version of events.