my ESA tribunal today!

Muttleythefrog

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

Unless your appeal was based on the old ESA descriptors, you'd better hope that the tribunal's reasons for awarding ESA Support Group were better than those mentioned, because based on your comments its an incorrect decision.

The ESA test is not walking it is mobilising, and is much stricter than the DLA one, so it is perfectly possible to have HRM and not even qualify for ESA, let alone the Support Group.

I was going to query that with atrix... I was being a bit lazy in assuming they had the mobilisation explanation.. i.e. wouldn't be able to use alternative to walking.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Muttleythefrog wrote: »

I was going to query that with atrix... I was being a bit lazy in assuming they had the mobilisation explanation.. i.e. wouldn't be able to use alternative to walking.

based on new descriptors.

the alternatives to walking wouldnt apply to me. exertion of manual propulsion wouldnt aid me but make me worse in the use of a wheel chair walking stick would be much use only in that i could carry one to lean on it for a rest as im breathless at rest anyway any excertion makes my chest tighten further even with ventolin and nebules. tribunal accepted that.

Cpt.Scarlet

topaziem wrote: »

I'm glad that you pointed that out. It is far easier to qualify for HRM of DLA than it is for the Support Group of ESA using the mobilising descriptor.

That is the reason why DLA is out of date and needs a radical overhaul, and why PIP is being brought out. PIP will equate much closer with the ESA descriptor on mobilising.

Generally PIP will not be all that different to ESA, which could well lead to one compulsory assessment at regular intervals - much the same as is with ESA now.

A close friend claims DLA HRM on the basis of virtually not being able to walk more than the 30 metres without suffering severe pain and discomfort, yet he is in the work group of ESA as it was decided that he could use a wheelchair to get about on.

My post wasn't intended as a comment on the system, but as you have raised the subject.

Many DLA claimants are only awarded DLA for 1 or 3 years and even those on indefinite can still be re-assessed under the Right Payment Programme.

As to PIP, disabled charities are already hi-lighting how PIP will force many DLA claimants out of work because they will lose their high rate mobility due to the new tests.

Nothing to cheer about.

meritaten

I accompanied Atrix to the Tribunal - what he says is what they said!
They did base their decision on the fact that he meets far stricter criteria for another benefit! They felt that they could not overturn that decision.
the consultants letter stating his condition hadnt changed didnt hurt either.
Neither did the fact that he had sent additional information and focused on the point that he was disputing. That seemed to go down well with them.
In fact, they actually thanked him for doing so!
so, you can quibble about it all you want - the fact remains that HE won his case for the reasons he has stated!

Atrix hun - could you copy and post this down in Disability and Dosh? I have noticed that there are a few down there facing ESA Tribunals! may be helpful to them!

Cpt.Scarlet

meritaten wrote: »

I accompanied Atrix to the Tribunal - what he says is what they said!
They did base their decision on the fact that he meets far stricter criteria for another benefit! They felt that they could not overturn that decision.
the consultants letter stating his condition hadnt changed didnt hurt either.
Neither did the fact that he had sent additional information and focused on the point that he was disputing. That seemed to go down well with them.
In fact, they actually thanked him for doing so!
so, you can quibble about it all you want - the fact remains that HE won his case for the reasons he has stated!

Atrix hun - could you copy and post this down in Disability and Dosh? I have noticed that there are a few down there facing ESA Tribunals! may be helpful to them!

I'm sorry to be pedantic about this, and my intention is to inform rather than anything else, however, the DLA test is less strict than the one for ESA, if the Judge records this as their reason for the award, then the DWP would be in a position to challenge it as an error of law.

If the panel considered other factors such as Atrix's ability to use a wheelchair then this would be a valid decision, but that's not what either of you are saying was stated as their reason.

Ellejmorgan

good for you well done

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

I'm sorry to be pedantic about this, and my intention is to inform rather than anything else, however, the DLA test is less strict than the one for ESA, if the Judge records this as their reason for the award, then the DWP would be in a position to challenge it as an error of law.

If the panel considered other factors such as Atrix's ability to use a wheelchair then this would be a valid decision, but that's not what either of you are saying was stated as their reason.

i do not know what the judges summary will be it wasnt described indepth we were there a matter of mins and as was per was said is all i know.

all the judge had basically said was that my evidence and my DLA tribunal award and that i narrowed it down for them was greatly helpfull in making the decision.

he pointed out that it was a valid argument and good point to the HRM and ESA descriptor.

as soon as i hear back from the tribunal services i will update this to the questions that are outstanding.

as i encluded in my esa 50
ive been told i would not qualify to have a wheel chair because the excersion triggers my asthma and breathlessness i would need to excert myself in order to proppell myself, i used to use a walking stick, but it does nothing in the way of aiding me to walk further during breathlessness or asthma attack its just there to lean on when i need it to rest, or as and when my back plays up and i lose feeling to my leg i can counteract the feeling of losing balance.
whether the above made it common sense to them to apply this to the descriptor i dont know i dont have this information, i would know very little had i been in to receive the phone call that there was no need to attend they had decided i wouldnt know as much now.

Cpt.Scarlet

I hope it works out for you.

sja75

Well done, chuffed for you

Cpt.Scarlet

topaziem wrote: »

But, and I have said this many times before on other forums, if the government were to accept those arguments, where would it end up? With exactly what DLA currently offers! In which case what will have been the point in bringing out PIP if at the end of the day there will be no financial savings?

There has to be savings from DLA alone of £2.55bn a year.

Surely if these savings have to be made, someone somewhere somehow will have to lose an entitlement.

Thank you for so clearly defining the issue.

PIP has nothing whatsoever to do with ensuring that those who need support with their disabilities get it, it's all about saving money, irrelevant of the impact on those effected.