Trials and Tribunalations.

rogerblack

Argh.

I find that while going through the statement of reasons from the tribunal, they've not mentioned - even to dismiss the arguments I sent in a week before the tribunal.

It seems they may not have even been sent them - though they were received by the tribunal service.

Moral of the story - even though you've sent evidence in to the tribunals service - take a copy with you, and hand them a copy, to make sure.

luminated

I am so sorry you are going through it BUT don't give up in your pursuit of the right outcome.

fogartyblue.

rogerblack wrote: »

Argh.

I find that while going through the statement of reasons from the tribunal, they've not mentioned - even to dismiss the arguments I sent in a week before the tribunal.

It seems they may not have even been sent them - though they were received by the tribunal service.

Moral of the story - even though you've sent evidence in to the tribunals service - take a copy with you, and hand them a copy, to make sure.

I am having a similar problem with an appeal that I am helping with.
Thankfully, I have been able to spot the problem before it reaches the Tribunal.

It seems that a considerable amount of medical evidence and various reports were sent to the DWP in April 2011, in asking for a reconsideration. The Reconsideration was carried out with no change. It was not until early this year when the submission was received from the DWP that had been sent to the Tribunal Service, that I noticed that the letter and enclosures dated April 2011 were not included.

The case is to be heard on the 30th April 2012, and as yet the DWP have still not answered my letters, or sent a copy of the April 2011 letter and enclosures to the Tribunal Service. It's as though they prefer to ignore that it exists!
What the DWP have said over the telephone is that they cannot find the April communication. Was it ever looked at when the reconsideration took place - I have no idea.

Had I not spotted this, the Tribunal would not have known about it and the appellant would have assumed that they did know about it.
Obviously I will ensure that I take a copy (it's a 22 page letter/report + medical evidence) to the hearing and ask the simple question as to why has this not been considered earlier by the DWP and why are they wasting the court's time!

So yes it is vital that when you go to a Tribunal hearing you have copies of everything!!!

rogerblack

fogartyblue. wrote: »

Had I not spotted this, the Tribunal would not have known about it and the appellant would have assumed that they did know about it.
Obviously I will ensure that I take a copy (it's a 22 page letter/report + medical evidence) to the hearing and ask the simple question as to why has this not been considered earlier by the DWP and why are they wasting the court's time!

Send this to the tribunals service directly.
It should have said that you can do this on the letter informing you of your appeal.
This gives them the chance to read it before the appeal.
Of course take a copy along too - but simply because it's failed once isn't a reason to ignore the procedure.

doyouwantfrieswiththat

fogartyblue. wrote: »

I am having a similar problem with an appeal that I am helping with.
Thankfully, I have been able to spot the problem before it reaches the Tribunal.

It seems that a considerable amount of medical evidence and various reports were sent to the DWP in April 2011, in asking for a reconsideration. The Reconsideration was carried out with no change. It was not until early this year when the submission was received from the DWP that had been sent to the Tribunal Service, that I noticed that the letter and enclosures dated April 2011 were not included.


The case is to be heard on the 30th April 2012, and as yet the DWP have still not answered my letters, or sent a copy of the April 2011 letter and enclosures to the Tribunal Service. It's as though they prefer to ignore that it exists!
What the DWP have said over the telephone is that they cannot find the April communication. Was it ever looked at when the reconsideration took place - I have no idea.

Had I not spotted this, the Tribunal would not have known about it and the appellant would have assumed that they did know about it.
Obviously I will ensure that I take a copy (it's a 22 page letter/report + medical evidence) to the hearing and ask the simple question as to why has this not been considered earlier by the DWP and why are they wasting the court's time!

So yes it is vital that when you go to a Tribunal hearing you have copies of everything!!!

I bet they were quick enough to stop/reduce your benefits.

fogartyblue.

doyouwantfrieswiththat wrote: »

I bet they were quick enough to stop/reduce your benefits.

Yes they amended the previous award of the DLA claim from HRM & MRC to LRM only - that was in Feb 2011. His motability car was removed from his home within 2 weeks of the reconsideration in April 2011.
Additionally the poor guy then lost all of his premiums for his Pension Credit claim which meant that the Pension Credit award was also cancelled. His income was slightly above the revised Appropriate Amount. He lost his entitlement to 100% Council Tax benefit as well as his housing benefit.

He has been left in dire straights financially.
Even if he wins at the Tribunal, he is going to have a hell of a job re-opening the Pension Credit claim in order to have that money paid to him as well as the council tax and housing benefit as it is now more than 13 months since the event.

It just shows what 'assumption' can lead to. The guy thought he had done everything possible.
He should have contacted the PS to ensure that the report had been received, but we all know that you never get to speak to anyone that can help. At best you get a promise of a returned call that never happens or at worst they never reply to letters (I have another case where I personally have sent 42 letters over the past 2 1/2 years to the PS and not received one reply!
That case is now a complaint case with them).

fogartyblue.

rogerblack wrote: »

Send this to the tribunals service directly.
It should have said that you can do this on the letter informing you of your appeal.
This gives them the chance to read it before the appeal.
Of course take a copy along too - but simply because it's failed once isn't a reason to ignore the procedure.

It's on my desk at the moment for that very reason! Thanks

No one apart from the DWP, has not followed procedure. The action that now has to be taken is not only have you got to take the DWP to the toilet, but are expected to wipe their backside as well!

Actually there is no procedure set down for cases like this. Any extra evidence (not previously seen by the DWP) should be sent to the Tribunal Service no later than 7 days before the hearing. There is nothing that even suggests that all of the evidence that had been sent to the DWP previously should be re-submitted to the Tribunal Service.

The DWP are responsible to ensure that evidence submitted to them is included in their submission.

But yes we have this area where they say that they haven't received it. Does that mean that everyone is supposed to go through the DWP submission papers to check that everything is as it should be? Does it mean that claimants are expectedto write to and telephone the DWP to ensure that every letter etc is received by them and has been actioned?

Is seems that you have to.

Try telling that to an ordinary guy who wouldn't know his backside from his elbow when it comes to dealings with the DWP!

rogerblack

fogartyblue. wrote: »

Try telling that to an ordinary guy who wouldn't know his backside from his elbow when it comes to dealings with the DWP!

Benefits cases are simple, and require no training.
This is why the government is removing the possibility of legal aid.

'Mr Clarke: Of course there can be borderline cases, but, with great respect to my hon. Friend, in the vast majority of cases it is fairly obvious whether one is arguing a point of fact or a point of law. In an ordinary welfare case, the question will be whether someone is fit for work or not fit for work, or living or not living at a particular address. When a point of law arises whereby it is not a question of the complexity of the regulations but of the actual meaning of the regulations, somebody like a tribunal judge will know that instantly and think, “That is quite an interesting point of law that I’ve not had before; this will go to the upper tribunal and I will certify that it would be rather nice to have some guidance.” In the end, we have to leave it to tribunals themselves to decide on the facts. Some may be blurred, but by and large, in the vast majority of cases, they will be reasonably clear.'

Someone needs to look into the spending on dried frog pills by the Cabinet.