ESA appeal won but DWP have asked for a Correction?

pxxuk

Hi everyone,

We have been in this silly system going around and around for the past few years as my mum suffers with fibromyalgia and IBS and I suffer with CFS/ME and IBS...

Anyway, long and short is mum was accepted into the WRAG and we appealed to have her put into the Support Group back in November after her Pathways interviews (and a grievance against her employer but thats another story!) she returned to work on reduced hours for two mornings a week, which she had to build up slowly, ie 1 hour, then 2hrs etc. With a lot of support from colleagues and a very adjusted role, a substantial amount of sick leave and annual leave, she attempted to cope for over 6 months, but eventually had to admit she was unable to manage work with her conditions.

When her medical was done we explained everything to the nurse who was very sympathetic however, if this went into her report, it was clearly ignored by the decision maker. We appealed the decision on which group she was placed as she had now tried working and failed and the appeal was finally heard last month and the Judge ruled in mum's favour. We were sent a copy of the decision in the post a few days later and have heard nothing since. Having been through this process already myself I knew it would take them at best 6-8 weeks to sort out so we haven't worried too much about it.

However, in the post today we received a new medical questionnaire so I gave the DWP a call to explain. They told me the form has to be completed no ifs, buts or maybes, and that they hadn't heard from the tribunal service... Sooo... I called them. They told me that the DWP have asked for a correction but he couldn't tell me what it was or explain what it meant. Has anyone come across this and what does it mean? It seems stupid to have to go through all of this, to win and then be told by the DWP it doesn't matter, we'll ignore the judge!?!

[Deleted User]

the dwp can appeal a tribunal decision on a point of law,other than that i`m not sure

Muttleythefrog

Hmm my guess would be they are pursuing an appeal against the lower tier tribunal decision... as woodbine refers to above.. or that they are challenging some issue of the timescale of award (or similar) and asking it to be corrected. If appeal then it wouldn't an appeal of the nature of yours... but they would have to argue that the tribunal made an error in law. An error in law is something like 'the tribunal applied the wrong law' or 'proper process was not followed'. But the word 'correction' to me suggests maybe the decision had an error in it and needs correcting.. seem to have seen others report similar recently.

My guess is that the new ESA50 is the start of a new reassessment... it could be just a fact finding mission.. but more likely to be a standard reassessment... often people find that following an appeal tribunal they are soon reassessed... not entirely surprising since usually many months if not a year has passed since the original decision.

I would be inclined to make a strong case for the Support Group criteria being met (if it is) as per the tribunal result and/or your medical evidence (try to get some if possible and send with ESA50) etc in that ESA50 somewhere... perhaps additional info section if necessary. Try to force ATOS and DWP on to back foot to reach decision of Support Group as per beaten track. That's a tactic I would advise at face value.

I would also advise not worrying about the appeal tribunal situation.. easy to say.. but in all probability this will come to nothing or be nothing more than a technical correction... a delay ultimately to processing what is hopefully a valid decision by tribunal. The results slip itself may shed light on matter... I presume it hasn't got anything silly on it like an award from a future date or wrong year.

pxxuk

Thank you both for your quick responses. Looking at what we have received from the Tribunal Service, it all looks to be correct as far as I can tell... Dates are true to the date we went, they have listed their reasons and point scores for the reasons... They have also recommended mum is not reassessed for at least 12 months which is what I had. I will however go over it again with a fine tooth comb to see if I can pinpoint anything. Thank you once again.

rogerblack

As I understand it, the reconsideration time, though the tribunals service has taken to putting this on the form - has no legal force at all.

As to 'correction' - well - it's possible for them to request corrections that are for 'slips of pen'.
So, if for example, it says you're entitled to the support group from Sep 1 1011, that can be simply corrected.

Also - if she's being put into the support group, points are quite irrelevant.
If the tribunal has said something like 'she gets 27 points, and is therefore entitled to the support group' - for example, that may be an example of a clear error that can be corrected.

To have found for the support group, they need to have either found she's at risk being put into the work-related group, or that one or more support group descriptors applies.

stamina9008

Hi, can you please attempt my question on ESA and WRAG?

You seem to know what youre talking about.

Thanks.

pxxuk

We had more descriptors to throw at them should they have needed clarification but they stopped at the first continence question and needed no more. Come it think of it they do mention points on the decision notice so hopefully that will be enough.

Thank you for all of your clarifying, it's very helpful and reassuring :-)

Muttleythefrog

pxxuk wrote: »

We had more descriptors to throw at them should they have needed clarification but they stopped at the first continence question and needed no more. Come it think of it they do mention points on the decision notice so hopefully that will be enough.

Thank you for all of your clarifying, it's very helpful and reassuring :-)

If the appeal was successful then there should be reference to the qualifying support group descriptor.. it might be tied up in language not clear to you with reference to schedule 3 or the like... but I would assume the notice should refer to her having 'limited capability for work related activity' or that she is 'entitled to Support group component'. If any clarity is required on the decision notice then you could state it here obviously with any personal details excluded.

clemmatis

robert367 wrote: »

If the attraction was effective then there should be referrals to the determining assistance team descriptor it might be linked up in terminology not obvious to you with referrals to routine 3 or the like but I would believe the observe should consult her having limited ability for perform relevant activity' or that she is entitled to Support team component. If any quality is needed on the choice observe then you could condition it here obviously with any individual information omitted.

REPORTED for spamming.

Bamber19

A correction is, as has been pointed out, simply that something on the decision notice needs changed (or may need changed) if it is a simple thing such as the appellant's name, NiNo or Reference being wrong then the administrative staff at HMCTS can correct it and send it back out. If it is a mistake in the body of the decision then it has to be referred to a District Tribunal Judge to decide if it needs to be corrected. That you've been told it is a correction that has been requested would on the face of it seem to be a good thing, as if the DWP wished to challenge the decision they would not do this by requesting a correction. It will likely be down to the wrong group being referred to or some detail being left off.