PIP - the new disputes journey, SCSS1 appeal form & guidance notes

speedfreek1000

The journey (flight of fantasy) of a PIP appeal.

Note: fails to state the appellant’s two time limits to act.

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/pip-disputes-journey.pdf

Tribunal Service SCSS1 appeal form

http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/forms/tribunals/sscs/sscs1.pdf

This is the guidance pages for the new appeals system

http://www.justice.gov.uk/forms/hmcts/sscs

bigboybrother

speedfreek1000 wrote: »

The journey (flight of fantasy) of a PIP appeal.

Note: fails to state the appellant’s two time limits to act.

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/pip-disputes-journey.pdf

Tribunal Service SCSS1 appeal form

http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/forms/tribunals/sscs/sscs1.pdf

This is the guidance pages for the new appeals system

http://www.justice.gov.uk/forms/hmcts/sscs

That all seems pretty straight forward.

One thing that I can't understand is this. From when the application form is submitted to the DWP in the first place until when the appeal has been lodged with the Tribunal Service, the DWP will have made two decisions.
Yet it is only at the time when the DWP have to prepare a response to the appeal does it seem that they start to pull their fingers out and start looking for and asking for supportive evidence - maybe by contacting the GP, Consultant or Social Services. They are then allowed to extend the 28 day deadline to submit the appeal response by as long as it takes for them to gather this additional evidence. Talk about long winded.

Why can't the DWP by forced to seek additional evidence either before the first decision is made or before when the Mandatory Reconsideration decision is made?

I thought that the whole idea was for the DWP/ATOS to be more proactive in getting evidence together to make sure that the right decision is made first time around.

All I can see is that it is going to take a hell of a lot longer before the claimant gets to a Tribunal in the future.

rogerblack

bigboybrother wrote: »

They are then allowed to extend the 28 day deadline to submit the appeal response by as long as it takes for them to gather this additional evidence. <snip>

All I can see is that it is going to take a hell of a lot longer before the claimant gets to a Tribunal in the future.

Other fun.
Confused person gets notice, doesn't understand it, bins it. Gets lost in post, or misplaced while someone gets advice.

You must include a copy of the mandatory reconsideration notice which shows the decision you are appealing against.

If you lose the notice, or it is not delivered to you, the time limit to your appeal is still running, and you are reliant on the DWP sending you another copy.

It is my understanding that the 28 day time limit for the DWP to respond to the tribunal doesn't come in until April 2014.

dori2o

bigboybrother wrote: »

All I can see is that it is going to take a hell of a lot longer before the claimant gets to a Tribunal in the future.

That is quite deliberately the case, in the hope that people will be so frustrated by the process of actually applying for, and being refused the benefit, that they will simply not bother with the further hassle and time of challenging the DWP/ATOS/CAPITA decisions.

bigboybrother

Information or evidence required for determining limited or severely limited ability to carry out activities


8(1) The Secretary of State may require C to provide any information or evidence required to determine whether C has limited ability or severely limited ability to carry out daily living activities or mobility activities.

(2) Where information or evidence is requested under paragraph (1), C must provide the information or evidence to the Secretary of State within one month from the date of the request being made or within such longer period as the Secretary of State may consider reasonable in the circumstances of the particular case.

(3) Where C fails without good reason to comply with the request referred to in paragraph (1), a negative determination in relation to the component to which the failure related must be made.



According to those regulations it is for the DWP at any of the stages prior to appeal to actively seek out evidence. In fact the regulations make a point of saying that if you don't produce the evidence that the DWP require you will be found to fail the claim.

That evidence as mentioned in 8(1) will have to be specific and cannot simply be 'any evidence that you know exists or might exist if you ask for it'

I still don't understand why according to the flowchart they only make reference to looking for evidence once an appeal has been lodged? Why not make reference to it before the initial decision is made or at the reconsideration stage?

The regulations clearly make it out that it is for the DWP to actively seek evidence from the claimant and not for the claimant to spend time, effort and money in obtaining evidence for the DWP only to find that the DWP don't want it as in their opinion it may be irrelevant.

I can see this regulation 8 being used a lot, in having claims closed down because the claimant has not fully provided everything to support their claim. This to me is to cover evidence that used to come about at an appeal hearing that hadn't previously been seen by the DWP. A dirty little trick to cut down on appeal hearings. 'If we don't see it at the point of claim and you think that you can show it to the Tribunal - no you won't, we'll shut your claim down before it gets to that point.'

I suspect that this regulation will be used just as much as regulation 7 (C&P) regs were it is used regularly to shut down claims where the DWP feel that the claimant isn't co-operating as much as they want him/her to. I have even seen reg 7 used by the DWP to cover hypothetical evidence, evidence that may or may not exist - but it then puts the burden on the claimant to prove that it doesn't exist and if it does. why he/she can't access it all within 30 days.

I have a most recent example of this with a friend of mine who made a claim for Pension Credit on the 13th March 2013, they have refused to allow their visiting team to come out to help him with gathering evidence of income, which is considerable & confusing, yet on the 9th April 2013 have written to him spelling out regulation 7 that if not all of the evidence required is with the Pension Service by the 18th April 2013 (one month from when they received the claim) The claim will be closed. Now if that's not harsh or intimidating I don't know what is. Expect the same from PIP.

Brassedoff

speedfreek1000 wrote: »

The journey (flight of fantasy) of a PIP appeal.

Note: fails to state the appellant’s two time limits to act.

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/pip-disputes-journey.pdf

Tribunal Service SCSS1 appeal form

http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/forms/tribunals/sscs/sscs1.pdf

This is the guidance pages for the new appeals system

http://www.justice.gov.uk/forms/hmcts/sscs

The disputes journey looks pretty straight forward, it does look as though its leaning on the information as supplied being the reason for the failure, so the onus being on the claimant.

I can only see some other points crying out for the courts to tweak theses rules further.

Just feel sorry for those first through the process.

bigboybrother

Brassedoff wrote: »

The disputes journey looks pretty straight forward, it does look as though its leaning on the information as supplied being the reason for the failure, so the onus being on the claimant.

I can only see some other points crying out for the courts to tweak theses rules further.

Just feel sorry for those first through the process.

So do I. When PIP was in the discussion stages, it was said that the DWP/ATOS would be a lot more proactive in seeking evidence than they were with DLA.

The only 'proactive' bit that I can see is the use of a bloody great big stick (aka reg 8) that puts everything back into the claimants camp to supply evidence. Like DLA, the vast majority wouldn't have a clue what evidence they should provide. Most under DLA see the evidence as being confirmation of a condition or disability!

Surely the DWP instead of threatening closure of claims should actually be saying - this is what we want and this is where you will find it. Even that wasn't what PIP was about, the DWP were told that they would be just as responsible in contacting people, other than the claimant for evidence to back up the claim.

To me, once again, what will happen with PIP will be no different to what happened with DLA with the DWP saying that the claimant must search out suitable evidence and we will not tell what we want, nor where you may find it - that's your job!

I can see an awful lot of PIP claims being closed as the claimants don't submit the right evidence within 1 month of making a claim.

The one and only reason for this draconian attitude is to cut down the volume and cost of appeals. No longer will it be acceptable to go to a Tribunal with new evidence in hand. If you don't submit this evidence to the DWP within that 31day period there won't be a claim to appeal about!

Brassedoff

Did I say "I feel sorry for those first"?

You could say they are bringing this particular court procedure in line with others, in respect to the disclosure rules. The system may be totally thrown by the amount of time someone's turned up with new evidence without sharing it with the other party. That could have allowed a change in decision or adjustment to their satisfaction. You cannot do that in any other court hearing.

I do see there are points that are against two aspects of HRA, but that will be up to a higher court.

If you have a condition or disability, this is notice for you to get your house in order with respect to proof that the bad back you visited the doctor for in 2001 is still bad.

I cannot deny they will clearly throw 60% off DLA, all of them with nonphysical mobility issues. So if you have conditions like depression, the chances of losing all DLA are almost certain the way I read the new PIP.

bigboybrother

Brassedoff wrote: »

Did I say "I feel sorry for those first"?

You could say they are bringing this particular court procedure in line with others, in respect to the disclosure rules. The system may be totally thrown by the amount of time someone's turned up with new evidence without sharing it with the other party. That could have allowed a change in decision or adjustment to their satisfaction. You cannot do that in any other court hearing.
.

Yes we do seem to be going down the route appertaining to the 'disclosure rules'.

But to be honest, how many, hand on heart can say that they trust ATOS/DWP enough to use the evidence in a proper and fit way?
I know I don't, you would currently get the same decision if you sent in a full blown medical report as you would if you sent then 3 copies of Zoo!!!

I always hold back my evidence for a tribunal simply because they are the only authority that can be trusted to give it the weight that it deserves.

rogerblack

bigboybrother wrote: »

Y
I always hold back my evidence for a tribunal simply because they are the only authority that can be trusted to give it the weight that it deserves.

Oh - look who it is.

Doing this is barking mad, and should only be done if you really don't care about the money.

Submit the evidence at the earliest possible time, ideally before a decision is made, and make copies and get postage reciepts.
If a report is generated - such as for ESA after a medical, get a copy of it, and respond, ideally before the initial decision, with any problems with that report.
This lets the decisionmaker have the best chance of making the right decision.
Similarly with reconsiderations.

Delaying until the tribunal before supplying your evidence risks the case being struck out (if it is not sensible to proceed without it - this can be done under present rules) and will delay the result of a decision by at least a year in many cases. During which time, in some circumstances you will not be entitled to benefit.
It also risks you losing other benefits if they come to be assessed during the time you're waiting to submit your evidence to the tribunal.

bigboybrother

rogerblack wrote: »

Oh - look who it is.

Doing this is barking mad, and should only be done if you really don't care about the money.

Submit the evidence at the earliest possible time, ideally before a decision is made, and make copies and get postage reciepts.
If a report is generated - such as for ESA after a medical, get a copy of it, and respond, ideally before the initial decision, with any problems with that report.
This lets the decisionmaker have the best chance of making the right decision.
Similarly with reconsiderations.

Delaying until the tribunal before supplying your evidence risks the case being struck out (if it is not sensible to proceed without it - this can be done under present rules) and will delay the result of a decision by at least a year in many cases. During which time, in some circumstances you will not be entitled to benefit.
It also risks you losing other benefits if they come to be assessed during the time you're waiting to submit your evidence to the tribunal.

Experience has taught me over the years that the DWP/ATOS are unable to give proper weight to evidence that has been sent in, only to find that at the Tribunal they take a different and more reasonable view of the whole case. How else can you explain that after being told that you are fit for work, not entitled to any award for DLA by the DWP, yet the Tribunal come to a totally different view and award the benefits using the same evidence?

Also consider how many cases there are where appeals have been allowed by the Tribunals over the past few years when evidence is tendered to the Tribunal that hasn't been seen by the DWP.

Your opinion and suggestions would work well in an ideal world, but since when does the DWP/ATOS actually work in this ideal world - they work in a world that exists only for their benefit.

Personally I have no faith in any of their systems.

Unfortunately the government in wanting to cut down on the number of appeals that are successful and are now proposing a tatic that will see claims being cancelled instead of being allowed to go to a Tribunal as they would have done under DLA.

In the case of a friend, he has the Pension Service now playing the same game regarding the submission of evidence. The PS are fully aware that it will be impossible for him to get all of the info to them by the deadline (they only wrote to him on the 9th April yet expect everything to be sent in by the 18th April - claim was received by the PS on the 18th March).

In his case a decision to not award a benefit will not be based on entitlement, but purely on a failure to submit. You can't very well appeal against a decision that hasn't been made not to award if there is no actual valid claim in being.

The government will do anything to stop the number of claims succeeding at a Tribunal even if they have to close claims down before making a decision not to award based on factual evidence.

It would seem that your idea is all that will be left. You will have to submit all of the evidence within 1 month of the date of the claim being made. Failure to do so will not only mean the closure of the claim, but the restriction of what you can take to a Tribunal.
You have a very trusting attitude towards ATOS/DWP that they will get to the right answer first time if people follow your rules. However there will be 1,000's that won't agree with your comments.