UC LCWRA appeal

tifo

HillStreetBlues said:

Sorry if I missed this, but out of interest  how many people on the panel? if there was three  did any of them dissent?

There were 2 people on the panel (judge and Dr) and they were in sync with each other, I must say they were nice to deal with.

tifo

I feel Shelter advising I have no further grounds for appeal is more to do with lack of staff than anything else, the welfare advisor they have is on sick, the manager would not say how long for, and mentioned that they're looking for another welfare advisor.

The manager did not seem to know some of the info she was telling me, for example thinking that the refusal of permission to appeal from the lower tribunal meant that it was the end of it, I had to explain that I can ask for this permission from the upper tribunal, and that the lower tribunal sent me the forms, but she did not seem to understand this. Initially she thought the refusal was from the upper tribunal. There were a few other things she said which did not add up.

poppy12345

Any internet forum isn't the place to get such advice, you need expert, specialist advice regarding this. This applies to both of your decisions. https://advicelocal.uk/

HillStreetBlues

Poppy is 100% correct.
To get to the upper chamber this is a legal issue, not a benefit one. So you will need to find a legal expert who knows benefit law, not an benefit advisor who knows some benefit law.

Alice_Holt

HillStreetBlues said:

Poppy is 100% correct.
To get to the upper chamber this is a legal issue, not a benefit one. So you will need to find a legal expert who knows benefit law, not an benefit advisor who knows some benefit law.

      IMO, ideally you need an benefits adviser who is well versed in PIP / UC legislation and case law. Some will have a legal background, some will not.
   
  You are correct in saying that to set aside a FTT tribunal there has to be an error of law such as: 

• The tribunal failed to follow legislation including case law.
• There is no evidence to support its decision.
• The facts are inconsistent with the decision.
• The decision failed to take account of certain issues or took account of the wrong ones.
• It did not give enough evidence.
• It did not provide adequate reasons for its decisions.
• There is a breach of the rules of natural justice.
  
  Additionally that error needs to have lead to the tribunal awarding a reduced / nil award
• 
  
• 
  
• The actual legal process is fairly straightforward - the expertise needed is someone with benefits knowledge, and ideally someone who has been involved with the FTT appeal who has worked with the claimant.
• 
  Organisations like CPAG (and other training providers) provide excellent training to enable benefit caseworkers to make successful appeals to an UT judge. 
   Also bear in mind that the UT judge makes the final decision, when they are looking at an appeal they will consider the FTT's decision very carefully and fully - it is quite possible they may find another / further error in law  made by the FTT   

  

calcotti

Alice_Holt said:.. Also bear in mind that the UT judge makes the final decision, when they are looking at an appeal they will consider the FTT's decision very carefully and fully - it is quite possible they may find another / further error in law  made by the FTT   

That certainly seems to happen, UT judges sometimes seem to say they don't need to discuss the matters raised in the submission because thy have found fault with the FTT for some other reason.

tifo

Hi, i'm going to have to do the permission to appeal (upper tribunal) myself unless i find someone to help. It's due within 2 weeks. The lower tribunal refused permission.

Any advice would be helpful as i'm going to draft the request.

Thanks

poppy12345

Asking on any internet forum isn't going to help you because we don't know all the details about your case. You will need to get more expert advice, aside from what you've already been advised by that other advice agency, if you're not happy with what they told you.

xxxxxxxx

I will read all of this thread maybe tonight. 

Until then,  you have absolutely no chance of appealing on grounds that you were assessed in 2021 when if you had been assessed in 2019 you would have passed for LCWRA. No chance what so ever. 

Just for curiosity though: 
Why do you think you would have got LCWRA in 2019? which descriptor? 
What descriptors and points were you awarded by the UC initial decision and or MR Decision?
What descriptors and points were you awarded by the Tribunal for LCW? 
Presumably you agree with the tribunal that on the date of your decision in September 2021 you did not meet any of the conditions for LCWRA?
What date did UC apply your LCW from? Ask them on your journal if you don't know.  
What date did your UC claim start? 
What date did you first declare your illness affecting your ability to work?
Did you get any arrears paid or owed as a result of LCW? < do you think you should have got any arrears via the work allowance?

You will not have to be reassessed for a very long time, they are not re-assessing people right now and when they do, they will have a huge backlog to get through. 

A new condition of cateracts will not likely put you in LCWRA - what LCWRA descriptor do you think you now meet with cateracts?

And if you ask for a review assessment, you could be found fit for work again.


 

tifo

xxxxxxxx said:

I will read all of this thread maybe tonight. 

Until then,  you have absolutely no chance of appealing on grounds that you were assessed in 2021 when if you had been assessed in 2019 you would have passed for LCWRA. No chance what so ever.

I'm not asking for this. That's a separate complaint (not claim) and the DWP accept their mistake. The claim should've been referred to an assessor in July 2019 but wasn't.

In their tribunal bundle the DWP say my application for a WCA was accepted in March 2019.

Just for curiosity though: 

Why do you think you would have got LCWRA in 2019? which descriptor? 

I'm not asking for this in this claim, but from end of 2018 to mid 2020 my eye condition was severe that work was impossible. This is the reason I had to come to UC, I was told i can't work so can't claim tax credits anymore. 

What descriptors and points were you awarded by the UC initial decision and or MR Decision?

None.

What descriptors and points were you awarded by the Tribunal for LCW? 

2 for help with therapy and 6 for walking up to 200 metres, then LCW under risk.

Presumably you agree with the tribunal that on the date of your decision in September 2021 you did not meet any of the conditions for LCWRA?

No, I don't agree. The nature of my conditions means it's not viable to stay in employment and i'm affected more than 50% of the year.

What date did UC apply your LCW from? Ask them on your journal if you don't know. 

The tribunal from June 2021 for 12 months but DWP did it for 15 months so until Sept 2023.

What date did your UC claim start?

Feb 2019 because I could not work.

What date did you first declare your illness affecting your ability to work?

Feb 2019 when I came to UC because of my conditions.

Did you get any arrears paid or owed as a result of LCW? < do you think you should have got any arrears via the work allowance?

No, there is no allowance for LCW after April 2017.

You will not have to be reassessed for a very long time, they are not re-assessing people right now and when they do, they will have a huge backlog to get through.

My reassessment is a long time away.

A new condition of cateracts will not likely put you in LCWRA - what LCWRA descriptor do you think you now meet with cateracts?

I don't know yet, but the clinician advised not to use screens as much as it exacerbates the condition and I have vision in only that eye.

And if you ask for a review assessment, you could be found fit for work again.

Yes, this is possible.

Replies above in bold. Thanks