We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

ESA Points of Law.

Hello, don't know the exact terms, but will ask me psychologist to write a letter to the tribunal in support of my ESA claim. Where can I find the 'points of law' specifically?

I know one states that 'a return to work will cause problems for the claimant' (paraphrasing badly there) I just can't locate what I'm looking for and want to prepare my tribunal documentation around this.

Any assistance greatly appreciated.

Comments

  • Not sure if you mean case law - which is what happens when appeal cases go to Upper Tribunal.

    I think you might mean the ESA regulations and the scoring system - this should be it http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/@disabled/documents/digitalasset/dg_177366.pdf
  • Thank you Eager, though I have found the Welfare Reform Act section 8 - A claimant may be treated as having limited capability for work if they:

    ...are suffering from a specific disease or disablement and there would be substantial risk to the health of any person if the claimant were found not to have limited capability for work.

    That's what I was looking for. Cheers for your help.
  • Muttleythefrog
    Muttleythefrog Posts: 20,662 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Yeah not quite sure to what you refer. Check out page 10/11 regarding non functional descriptors in the link given above.... I suspect it might be one of them rather than standard descriptors for WRAG or Support Group.
    "Do not attribute to conspiracy what can adequately be explained by incompetence" - rogerblack
  • Muttleythefrog
    Muttleythefrog Posts: 20,662 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Ah you got there..lol... that's what I suspected you referred to.
    "Do not attribute to conspiracy what can adequately be explained by incompetence" - rogerblack
  • Muttleythefrog
    Muttleythefrog Posts: 20,662 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    I would add... if the psychiatrist is prepared to help with documentary evidence for your appeal.. then I would try to get them to confirm the standard descriptors they feel apply too in case the tribunal isn't persuaded of the exceptional circumstances.
    "Do not attribute to conspiracy what can adequately be explained by incompetence" - rogerblack
  • Thanks Muttley,

    Are those standard desscriptors in the link above??
  • Muttleythefrog
    Muttleythefrog Posts: 20,662 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Thanks Muttley,

    Are those standard desscriptors in the link above??

    Yep.. WRAG from page 17 (15 points total required to qualify). Support Group from page 24 (any descriptor sufficient to qualify).
    "Do not attribute to conspiracy what can adequately be explained by incompetence" - rogerblack
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 354.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.4K Life & Family
  • 261.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.