please help me - DLA

Chrysalis

my research and experience of DLA has determined this.

officially DLA mobility component should be rewarded if cannot walk or virtually unable to walk.

in reality if you have a condition thats on their qualifying list and medical proof you will get DLA regardless of ability to walk.

I expect its done this way as its easier to administer then do more thorough tests to determine ability to walk. The losers of this policy are people with rare or undiagnosed conditions as the DLA check simply rejects them by not having a qualifying condition, I have had welfare workers admit this when I pointed some stuff out to them.

2_litre

i dont agree ive been trying to get my dla reinstated for 3 years and have finally lost heart i was told its not what you have but how it affects you i was had by there emp and the tribunal decided his opinion was more reliable than my facts
is there a link to this list of qualifying conditions ?

Chrysalis

2 litre there is indeed a link somewhere and tommorow I will try to find it for you the how it affects you is the official line but the guide for decision makers says something somewhat different.

the decision makers have guidelines on how to handle cases and in it is a list of conditions that would likely affect walking so they are used.

if what you was told was true I would have got DLA for example, I was baffled as to why I didnt get it so did some digging. I also put the question to my MP who passed it onto the MP who is in charge of welfare and have heard nothing at all in reply which leads me to suggest the defenition of virtually unable to walk or unable to walk is not officially used.

Decision makers usually just rubber stam EMP's decisions tribunals have overuled them however, when I went to a tribunal last month they selectively used evidence that supported the DMs decision and ignored the evidence that supported my position however I have been told they have acted within the boundaries of the law so any further appeal would serve no purpose. In my case I am simply going to claim again but not right now I will wait a few months.

Maybe I should make a new thread for this but brief of my situation.

Provided evidence of how my life is affected effectively housebound cannot go out to shop etc. and anything I buy has to be purchased online and delivered.
Sister effective carer does my errands for me such as getting prescriptions, taking cheque to bank, posting letters etc.
I cannot walk outside for more than a few dozen or so steps without serious pain and generally need to hold onto things and keep stopping.
I cannot walk at all with footwear on (however the law has no regard for this if you cant wear footwear it means nothing when claiming)
I have no strong diagnosis for my walking problems.

How my claim was treated

DM turned me down without even doing a medical they turned me down using my application form as only evidence, the form clearly stated my diffilculties, what medication I was on etc. However it had no diagnosis. (see what I mean?)

I appealed

Tribunal asked me questions but were hostile towards me with one of the tribunal members sitting sniggering (the carer) my guess is they found it funny I was just wearing socks. At the end the chairman told me the fact I even made it to them as far as he is concerned means I am not virtually unable to walk he completely disregarded what discomfort I was in, how fast I walked and if I had to stop etc. I was planning to mention about the lack of a medical but due to nerves I didnt mention this and I guess they thought nothing of the issue I didnt have a medical. Unaminously turned down.

When I got the statement of reasons from them there was quite a few inaccuracies such as they stated I was on no prescribed medication but later in the same paragraph they went on about some of my medication. Also because one question they asked me didnt match what was on my 6 month old application form they decided my answers were unreliable and as such anything from me wasnt used as evidence by them which I find very harsh. They acknowledged other evidence I provided proving my immobile lifestyle but that was it it wasnt mentioned how they used it in their decision basically it wasnt used but disregarded. This led me to the conclusion the tribunal made their mind up the moment they set eyes on me and were then only collecting their reason to support their decision. They even put they felt I was putting on the condition for the purpose of claiming benefit effectively accusing me of fraud. Which I found very offensive.

2_litre

you like me have been robbed by the dwp i had high rate mobility and low rare care and lost both and after 2 years of trying to get it reinstated have just lost a tribunal despite overwhelming evidence to support me ive yet to receive the statement of reasons but i suspect it will be a load of rubbish to stop me claiming ive now decided to give up trying its to much and i cant take the hassle anymore so the govenment gets another 1 off there list

Mrs_Supersaver_1

Patchy 987, hope 2008 will be a lot better for you and your family and that your health will improve somewhat. Please take one day at a time, and give yourself one task to do at a time - small steps and I promise things will improve

Chrysalsis - will this help? www.dwp.gov.uk/medical/guides_detailed.asp.

trace_567

I'd like to ask the person who posted that the OP should get a home computer based job, where on earth they are supposed to get one from? A legitimate one that would actually pay the bills. Since in fact these are few and very far between.

They also fail to realise that the OP is getting help from a therapist and support worker, of which I expect are trying to work with them on getting out and about more. Thus improving their quality of life, and their job prospects for the future.
The OP might well have difficulty, which could in turn cause a relapse by trying to take on too much when they might well not be ready yet. Further financial hardship can also worsen their condition.

Depression, anxiety, agoraphobia and social anxiety can be EXTREMELY debilitating. Obviously the people telling this person to find a home job have no idea what they are talking about.

Chrysalis

I apologise it seems the only link I can find regarding diagnosed conditions isnt public domain however I know there was one so will continue to look for it.

I did find evidence of people with undiagnosed conditions getting DLA but they were awarded by commissioners who noted that legislation says a diagnosis is required. The need of a diagnosis isnt in any DLA consumer guide I have read tho. I have noticed the lack of response to my post people like to pretend these things dont happen and its easiest to turn a blind eye.

I surprisingly got a response from my MP 2 days ago which is why I am ammending this post.

As said in the other post I had asked my MP questions regarding the law specifically why the claimant is told virtually uneable to walk qualifies for DLA when in truth the law is applied differently in that you must have a diagnosis that fits a profile that decision makers use to award benefit.

It seems my MP must have not got a reply from the responsible minister so instead she wrote to the decision makers again and got another reply of them it was 2 pages but I got 2 copies of the first page so incomplete and it simply said some stuff about how they dont have to legally do medicals I used my right to appeal and lost so all is hunky dory.