Appeal Help

Muttleythefrog

Beetlebug1983 wrote: »

Yes, Rogerblack & Muttleythefrog this is what has been done in haste an panic and also mis-advised and us not checking properly. The appeal has been sent in with regards to the end of 365 which was wrong.

Not sure what to do now? Are we able to lodge another appeal against the ESA50/WRAG decision on the 30/05/2012 whilst we have the doomed 365 one still in process?

Help (

**Update -
I have since called the DWP and been told that I can lodge a second appeal. I will get on to this asap - and collect as much evidence in as possible. I've emailed his psychologist requesting a further letter of support.

Any advice will be much appreciated!!

Beetlebug xx

Sounds like you might be able to send in 'second appeal' to try to make a proper case for Support Group then. Hopefully this is what will happen... that in effect you can add to your appeal request by giving the true case this time. Evidence... if you do request supporting letter I remind you again... descriptors... descriptors... descriptors...lol... do not ask them to write a letter of support without giving them an idea of the material required. If you just ask for a letter of support they may well do exactly that 'I support my patient's claim for ESA as they currently can't work'... which would be pretty useless. If you've got supportive medical pros available then use then to get targetted evidence. So first stop Support Gp descriptors... which ones apply, get the evidence to support that view.

Beetlebug1983

Thanks Muttleythefrog - I am going to get on the case now. The 30/05/12 letter states that he was scored 15 points so we need to focus on the issues that they have not addressed.

Muttleythefrog

Beetlebug1983 wrote: »

Thanks Muttleythefrog - I am going to get on the case now. The 30/05/12 letter states that he was scored 15 points so we need to focus on the issues that they have not addressed.

Focus on the Support Group descriptors..lol. Forget the WRAG descriptors for now I'd say.. except of course the ones (some 15 points ones) that also are support group descriptors. What you don't want to do is find yourself dragged in to arguing for WRAG descriptors applying that ATOS didn't state in the ESA85A (I'm assuming here that DWP view is a rubber stamping of that document) which don't qualify you for Support Gp anyway. Your appeal case is in effect a simple one... you think he should be in Support Group because descriptor(s) x ,y (or special circumstance criteria z) apply and this is why and here is the evidence (if you can get any). e.g. I should be found to meet Support Group criteria because I cannot chew or swallow food and drink. I can't chew or swallow food and drink as I do not have a mouth. Please refer my GP's letter stating that I was born without a mouth and how I have to take nutrition using specialist equipment. (silly example but off the top of my head...lol)

rogerblack

Muttleythefrog wrote: »

Your appeal case is in effect a simple one... you think he should be in Support Group because descriptor(s) x ,y (or special circumstance criteria z) apply and this is why and here is the evidence

This is possibly going to be a 'late appeal' - so does not go through automatically.
If the decision not to grant support group status from the repeat ESA50 was made over a month ago, and you were posted the decision, then this is a late appeal.

There are several arguments that come to mind to justify the late appeal.

The DWP should have read your appeal for the decision against time-limiting as an appeal against the earlier decision against the new ESA50.

What was the date on the ESA85?
Was it made after you reported the change of circumstances?

Beetlebug1983

rogerblack wrote: »

This is possibly going to be a 'late appeal' - so does not go through automatically.
If the decision not to grant support group status from the repeat ESA50 was made over a month ago, and you were posted the decision, then this is a late appeal.

There are several arguments that come to mind to justify the late appeal.

The DWP should have read your appeal for the decision against time-limiting as an appeal against the earlier decision against the new ESA50.

What was the date on the ESA85?
Was it made after you reported the change of circumstances?

Hi Rogerblack.

The ESA50 was originally submitted on the 28/03/2012.

The date on the ESA85A is 20/04/2012.

The letter confirming the points and the decision was dated 30/05/2012.

Where do I stand with this? If this is a late appeal, what would be the best reason to put down?

Muttleythefrog

Beetlebug1983 wrote: »

Hi Rogerblack.

The ESA50 was originally submitted on the 28/03/2012.

The date on the ESA85A is 20/04/2012.

The letter confirming the points and the decision was dated 30/05/2012.

Where do I stand with this? If this is a late appeal, what would be the best reason to put down?

Appeal should be in time then. The dates make sense... about 3 weeks for ATOS to construct ESA85A from evidence supplied (ESA50)/available.. and about a month for DWP to take decision following ATOS supplying ESA85A. So it does appear the ESA50 triggered a reassessment. (It is conceivable that ATOS contacted his GP to complete an ESA113 form for evidence... sometimes they do.. but quite probably they'd have made reference to 113 on the ESA85A if so). You'd have until around the end of June to indicate intention to appeal... I'd make sure you have made a case for appealing the WRAG decision in writing to them by then to be safe. Evidence could be supplied after this date but obviously as time progresses the less chance you'll beat them to the punch in terms of any reconsideration they do... which hopefully is what they intend to do based on appeal for Support Gp.

Beetlebug1983

Thank you muttleythefrog. This is reassuring to us. Thank goodness we completed the ESA50 and posted it to them in March to notify them of his condition worsening. At least this has given us something to cling on to. We are not holding our breath but all we can do is be honest and try our best. I have printed off the GL24 off the internet so that I can get it completed again tonight and posted to them tomorrow. I can then gather all the evidence and forward it on to them in due course.

The ESA85A refers to The ESA50, Med 3 (no idea what this is) along with the evidence we sent (Dr letter, Psychologist letter etc).

Should we write a covering letter to explain why we are sending the second appeal due to the confusion - or should I just leave it?

Big thanks in advance!

Muttleythefrog

Beetlebug1983 wrote: »

Thank you muttleythefrog. This is reassuring to us. Thank goodness we completed the ESA50 and posted it to them in March to notify them of his condition worsening. At least this has given us something to cling on to. We are not holding our breath but all we can do is be honest and try our best. I have printed off the GL24 off the internet so that I can get it completed again tonight and posted to them tomorrow. I can then gather all the evidence and forward it on to them in due course.

The ESA85A refers to The ESA50, Med 3 (no idea what this is) along with the evidence we sent (Dr letter, Psychologist letter etc).

Should we write a covering letter to explain why we are sending the second appeal due to the confusion - or should I just leave it?

Big thanks in advance!

I'd be tempted to say you're sending it to clarify the grounds for appeal you made... try to make it appear this is follow up information for that appeal request. But this time be very clear... the Support group descriptors you feel apply and therefore that he should be in the Support Group now. If the GL24 form doesn't seem convenient for format purposes then you can write a letter instead...appeals don't have to be made on GL24 but do have to be made in writing. State you'll be intending to gather supporting medical evidence shortly and send it too.. might buy some time.

Med3 I think refers to sicknote... might be an old medical certificate from GP. What is concerning is that the ESA85A refers to the ESA50... the ATOS HCP may have relied upon that (ESA50) as primary evidence that Support Group criteria is not met. This raises the issue regarding the Support Group descriptor(s) you raise as applying now... I just hope you don't appear to conflict with what has been stated in that form... or for that matter conflict with evidence you sent in. The ESA50 form is not ideally designed for getting some information relevant to some Support Group descriptors.

Beetlebug1983

I made a copy of the ESA50 so I have that to hand to check what we had put down. But when you read the ESA85A and match it up with the answers given with the ESA50 - It's as if ATOS haven't even read it.

I'm in two minds as what do for for the best - send a new GL24 or just write a letter. Not sure which is the best option.

Muttleythefrog

Beetlebug1983 wrote: »

I made a copy of the ESA50 so I have that to hand to check what we had put down. But when you read the ESA85A and match it up with the answers given with the ESA50 - It's as if ATOS haven't even read it.

I'm in two minds as what do for for the best - send a new GL24 or just write a letter. Not sure which is the best option.

Yeah they may pay little regard for the ESA50 form... not sure mine have ever been read properly either. The ESA50 answers will probably be treated with little respect unless evidentially corroborated.

On the second point I'd say whichever is most suitable to you to convey the case for appeal... that Support group criteria x is applicable. Don't lose focus. If you can convince the DWP, or later a tribunal, that Support group criteria x or y is met then that's it.