DLA Appeal (child)

Zziggi

My little 'un. was awarded DLA care highest rate and no mobility. As they are under 5 years of age the decision maker can only award high rate mobility or none at all. My child is nearly 4 years old. We have asked for the mobility component from their 3rd birthday (july 2004). We asked for reconsideration - decision was no mobility. We appealed. We asked for a paper hearing. I got the letter back today. The letter says that the appeal for the mobility component is "disallowed". I assume this is the legal mubo-jumbo for our appeal was rejected?

Also the only explination in the letter was that our child does not fit the criterior for high rate mobility but will continue to get high rate care component.

Can i expect more of an explination? Will i get a fuller explination in due course? Do i have to request a full explaination of why my child doesn't fulfill the high rate mobility component?

The only reason I ask is that i noted on the letter who the chariperson of the panel was for my child's appeal. This is the same chairperson who asked my partner inappropriate questions at their DLA appeal a couple of years ago. We complained about the chairperson through our advisor but got nowhere. So we are now naturally suspicious of this particular chairperson - we want to make sure they have now treated our child fairly. Call me paranoid if you like, but quite a fuss was made of the racist undertones in the chairperson's questioning and since we have a rather distinctive (foreign) name, we are a little paranoid that the chairperson may have remembered us. Infact it was because of this chairperson's line of questioning that made us request a paper hearing and not an oral hearing as we couldn't face it again - despite the warnings i've read on MSE about the relative sucess rates of paper -v- oral appeal hearings.

I just want to make sure my child's appeal has been refused 'fairly'. And if so, how long can i leave it before i try again?

Bold is edited text.

Ted_Hutchinson

Zziggi wrote:

My little 'un. was awarded DLA care highest rate and no mobility. As they are under 3 years od age the decision maker can only award high rate mobility or none at all.

DLA high rate mobility can only be awarded to children FROM the age of three years. So if your child is under 3 years old that is the reason no award could be made and there is absolutely no point in appealing this matter as an award for high rate mobility can only start from the 3rd birthday.

Zziggi

Sorry Ted_Hutchinson, i made a typo.

What i meant is you can only get either no mobility or high rate mobility if the child is under 5. My child is 3 3/4 - will be 4 in July. We were asking for the mobility component to be looked at from my child's 3rd birthday (last july).

Ted_Hutchinson

As you are aware that only around 30% of paper hearing support the claimant while up to 70% of appeals attend by both claimant and a representative are won I won't repeat my advice that it is very important the claimant attends.

However, you can ask for a written a statement of reasons for the decision not to award the higher rate of mobility if this is the element you were appealing and you believe you have provided evidence to meet the criteria for that element. So perhaps it would be worth asking for a written statement of reasons, so you can be sure no error of law has been made. When you get the detailed reasons for not awarding post back.

Zziggi

Ted_Hutchinson wrote:

As you are aware that only around 30% of paper hearing support the claimant while up to 70% of appeals attend by both claimant and a representative are won I won't repeat my advice that it is very important the claimant attends.

However, you can ask for a written a statement of reasons for the decision not to award the higher rate of mobility if this is the element you were appealing and you believe you have provided evidence to meet the criteria for that element. So perhaps it would be worth asking for a written statement of reasons, so you can be sure no error of law has been made. When you get the detailed reasons for not awarding post back.

Thanks Ted. Just out of interest, if i had asked for an oral hearing would i had had to take my child to the hearing? I ask because another reason i opted for a paper hearing was i thought it was unfair for a 3 year old to be expected to attend the oral hearing and hear themselves been talked about.

Zziggi

Sorry lots of questions...

Ted_Hutchinson, if we had to go to an appeal in future, do you have the right to request a different chairperson if we ended up getting this particular chairperson at an oral hearing? Prior to the hearing, can we explain to The Appeals Service we have good reason why they may be predjudiced against our case (i mean prejudiced in the sense of already having a complaint made against them by us rather than predjudiced in a racist/sexist type of way)?

I know you can request a different medical member of the panel if you have ever been seen by the doctor who is on the panel. So can you kinda do this for the chairperson?

blue-kat

no you don't have to take a child to a DLA appeal hearing.
I attended on behalf on my (then) 15 yr old son, and also have a rep with me.

I would be tempted to decline hearing with certain Chair by saying you've met them in another capacity which may affect their impartial status.
-
blue-kat

Ted_Hutchinson

Zziggi wrote:

Sorry lots of questions...

Ted_Hutchinson, if we had to go to an appeal in future, do you have the right to request a different chairperson if we ended up getting this particular chairperson at an oral hearing? Prior to the hearing, can we explain to The Appeals Service we have good reason why they may be predjudiced against our case (i mean prejudiced in the sense of already having a complaint made against them by us rather than predjudiced in a racist/sexist type of way)?

I know you can request a different medical member of the panel if you have ever been seen by the doctor who is on the panel. So can you kinda do this for the chairperson?

Sorry I overlooked this question.
If you notified the Appeal Service of your opinion, that using a Chairperson whose conduct you have previously regarded as unfair, to conduct a further appeal, might be regarded as a biased on their part and thus lead to further disputes under the Human Rights legislation suspect you would not have that particular chair chosen. I've known cases where a tribunal was held in a different region to ensure the appeal wasn't contaminated by the appearence of bias.

Ted_Hutchinson

Zziggi wrote:

if i had asked for an oral hearing would i had had to take my child to the hearing?

You don't have to take your child to the appeal if you attend yourself. It can in certain circumstances be sensible to take the child if you feel that this will demonstrate to the panel the need for care, mobility or simply to show that statements made by the Examining Medical Practitioner are simply dishonest. The panel cannot medically examine the claimant but they can use their eyes and if it is blatently obvious that statements made as medical fact by the DWP are simply dishonest, then presenting the child and pointing to the erroneous statements made by the EMP, may make the point that a panel accepting a medical report which is demonstrably fundamentally dishonest may appear biased to an impartial observer.

jenbren

im confused by this. if ur child is aged 3 or over and cannot walk at all, then he/she shud get molbility component at the higher rate. i there any grey area about her/him walking? i.e has she/he got a recognised illness that prevents he/she from walking?

Ted_Hutchinson

jenbren wrote:

im confused by this. if ur child is aged 3 or over and cannot walk at all, then he/she shud get molbility component at the higher rate. i there any grey area about her/him walking? i.e has she/he got a recognised illness that prevents he/she from walking?

I'm afraid that the definition of "Virtually unable to walk" isn't quite as straightforward as the words themselves might at first indicate. Perhaps if you read the thread DLA - Mobility compotent - why not try for the highest rate?you would appreciate that while someone may be able to put one foot in front of the other, they may still be unable to walk because of the danger they present to themselves or others. There then follows the debate as to whether the cause of this impairment is physical or mental and whether the mental impairment is that of arrested development of the brain.