When a Tribunal not a Tribunal.

skeggysteve

Richie - not sure what you mean by "oral or paper".

.....................

The DWP awarded my wife DLA based on the information she gave and on information from her GP, who I'm sure you will agree would know a lot about her medical condition.

The DWP stopped her DLA after a report from an ATOS doctor that saw my wife for about 15 minutes, didn't examine her and made factual errors in his report.

My wife appealed the decision to stop her DLA.
The DWP turned down her appeal and said the next step was a tribunal.

We both assumed that the tribunal would be 'was the DWP right in stopped her DLA'.

The paper evidence give to the tribunal (prior to the 'hearing') was only the ATOS doctors report.

But, as I have said, the tribunal seemed to gloss over the errors in the ATOS report. It was more like a DWP interview to see if she was eligible for DLA.

............................

To give you an idea about the ATOS doctors report:

He asked if my wife could buy a pint of milk at a petrol station, my wife said yes because our local petrol station had a woman that came out and put the fuel in and would get anything from the shop for her.

My wife told this to the ATOS doctor - so he put in his report:
"Mrs xxxxx can do shopping"

Cpt.Scarlet

Why did the doctor visit, they don't just turn up, was it a renewal or was she being assessed under the Right Payment system?

In either case she should have completed and returned a DLA renewal form?

Did you provide any evidence or submissions for the appeal?

nannytone_2

skeggysteve wrote: »

Richie - not sure what you mean by "oral or paper".

.....................

The DWP awarded my wife DLA based on the information she gave and on information from her GP, who I'm sure you will agree would know a lot about her medical condition.

The DWP stopped her DLA after a report from an ATOS doctor that saw my wife for about 15 minutes, didn't examine her and made factual errors in his report.

My wife appealed the decision to stop her DLA.
The DWP turned down her appeal and said the next step was a tribunal.

We both assumed that the tribunal would be 'was the DWP right in stopped her DLA'.

The paper evidence give to the tribunal (prior to the 'hearing') was only the ATOS doctors report.

But, as I have said, the tribunal seemed to gloss over the errors in the ATOS report. It was more like a DWP interview to see if she was eligible for DLA.

............................

To give you an idea about the ATOS doctors report:

He asked if my wife could buy a pint of milk at a petrol station, my wife said yes because our local petrol station had a woman that came out and put the fuel in and would get anything from the shop for her.

My wife told this to the ATOS doctor - so he put in his report:
"Mrs xxxxx can do shopping"

by 'paper or oral' tribunal, richie means... did she attend the tribunal?

a paper tribunal is one vased solely on the paperwork each side provides. an oral tribunal is one where the claimant appears and can be questioned by the tribunal.

i still dont understand why the DWP seem to have relooked into the claim without reason.
although DLA can be reassessed at any time, it is most usual for this to be done at renewal times

Richie-from-the-Boro

There were many [unintentional I'm sure] omissions in the O/P's original and subsequent input. Those targeted[ed] by the DWP's [random & target(ed)] Right Payment Programme [RPP] and possibly an oral [in person] appeal might well attract a Presenting officer [PO] to the proceedings. My point was that its unlikely outside the two scenarios above a PO would be in attendance.


Cpt.Scarlet - BenefitBaby ?

HB58

As this was a DLA tribunal, surely there should have been 3 panel members plus any DWP Presenting Officer? If, as the OP has stated, there were only 2 people I believe that could have been an Error In Law?

skeggysteve

HB58 - sorry if I didn't make it clear, there were 3 panel members.

Richie - not sure why you think I've not said things in my posts. If there is anything you want to know just ask.
Thanks for the link, very interesting reading.

The reason for the ATOS doctors visit:
My wife applied for DLA after her GP said she should be getting it, she filled in the form and asked for the carers element.
I don't consider myself to be her carer - I'm her husband!

The DWP awarded the DLA and said they would look into the carers element. They then said the ATOS doctor was visiting to assess her care needs.

The ATOS doctor was very surprised when we told him that was what we thought he was there for - he said he was there to do a routine check, nothing to be worried about etc.

From the DLA award to the doctors visit was about 6 months with the DLA being stopped about 2 months later.

Richie-from-the-Boro

skeggysteve,

I did say unintentional, for example :

[?Month] Last year - in #1 you said, HRDLA but didn't say whether it was for care or mobility. BTW indefinite means indefinite - till they or you decide to change something.

November last year - ATOS did a home visit and the DLA was stopped

[?Month] [Year] - your wife appealed

[Mid June 2013] - your wife's appeal was heard & turned down

[?Month] 2013 - your wife appealed again

Somewhere in this date range your wife opened the door of 'a change in circumstances' when she "applied for DLA after her GP said she should be getting it, she filled in the form and asked for the carers element"

So we have care / or / and mobility. A change of circs and a carers allowance claim.

skeggysteve

Richie,

1. I thought DLA was just for mobility problems and the care element was separate, sorry if I got it wrong/didn't make it clear.

2. Correct.

3. When DLA was stopped and we finally found out - long story not relevant here.

4. Tribunal was last month, June.

5. Don't understand what you mean - she appealed it was rejected went to tribunal, she has written to the Tribunal service to complain about how the tribunal was conducted, that's it to date.

................
BTW when I posted this thread I didn't expect this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt0Y39eMvpI

Just to make it clear I think the questions your asking are valid but it does seem like the link at times!

nannytone_2

[sorry, but i'm still a little confused.

when she originally applied for DLA what was her award?
you say high rate.... but was that for care or for mobility or noth?

if it was just for mobility and she then applied for care ( which she would have to get at least MRC for you to claim carers allowance) this would have caused the ATOS medical.

it seems that you are saying that this medical caused the loss off DLA, and that is the decision you appealed.

if this is the case, and the appeal was lost, you can only fight this decision on a point of law .... if the procedure was incorrectly carried out.

the only other oprion is to reapplyB][/B]

rogerblack

nannytone wrote: »

the only other oprion is to reapply

Or to apply for PIP - as DLA has come to an end for new applicants >16.