PIP Tribunal second attempt

leamingtonspaceman

Hi.

My wife applied for PIP in January 2024. She got zero points. Mandatory reconsideration also awarded her zero points.

Went to a tribunal which was in March. They also awarded my wife zero points.

The main reasons for refusing her PIP were as follows from the 'statement of reasons':

1. My wife went to school so is 'educated.'
2. She has a bank account.
3. She has a passport.
4. She has a driving licence.
5. She worked in a post office until 2023.
6. She was asked by the judge if she has a wardrobe. She does. This was deemed to demonstrate that she has 'organisational skills.'
7. She attended the tribunal (it was a video tribunal).
8. She is in acute pain 4-5 days a week, but the judge said there aren't enough days in the week for that to be true.
9. She hasn't sought private counselling.

Before anyone asks, yes... these were valid reasons the judge gave for refusing her PIP.

Anyway, we sought advice and were informed that there were points that erred in law, so my wife was able to contest the decision. These were submitted and a different judge set aside the first tribunal decision as they agreed with the erring of law and were satisfied there was case law to support it. It appears that the judge felt the panel completely ignored all of my wife's supporting evidence and never took it into consideration. They were wholly led by the DWP health professional report. They also failed to consider her ESA medical report which is also carried out by DWP and has many overlapping parts.

My wife now has to wait for another tribunal.

I'm wondering if a second tribunal is more likely to succeed after a judge has set aside the first?

Has anyone got any experience of a similar situation?

We are led to believe that if her next tribunal is also unsuccessful, she can appeal again and even if that appeal isn't upheld, then there is an 'upper tribunal' that can rule?

Any advice, help, input etc is greatly appreciated.

NedS

I'm wondering if a second tribunal is more likely to succeed after a judge has set aside the first?

It should have absolutely no bearing. The new tribunal should consider the facts as they are presented and make a decision based on those facts. What has happened before is not relevant. Your wife should not be tempted to argue her case based on the previous tribunal or that it's decision has been set aside.

Think of this as if it is your wife's first tribunal. In my experience, tribunal panel members are very skilled at asking the questions and ascertaining the information that they need to reach their outcome in an impartial manner. Maybe you were just unlucky with the first tribunal members.

HillStreetBlues

I agree with NedS They haven't stated the decision is incorrect, but the way the decision was made is incorrect.
The FTT should consider all relevant information, and decide on that bases, even if they disregard it after that consideration.

I agree I think you were unlucky with the first tribunal.

The only cause of any appeal by a decision of the FTT is on a point of law, which you did and can do again either by getting the decision set aside or having the UT rule on it and you can do that again

Ms_Chocaholic

Have you had any help with the tribunals. I am aware that Fightback can help but unsure if they help with form filling and then go from there right thru to tribunal if not awarded.

leamingtonspaceman

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043166#Comment_82043166

My wife used Fightback.

She had a terrible experience with them.

My wife got advice from another organisation regarding the erring in law, and it was free.

marcia_

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6673459/pip-tribunal-second-attempt

what disabilities is she claiming for? Those reasons for rejection seem strange,

born_again

She is in acute pain 4-5 days a week,

How does this effect the descriptors?

I was under the impression that 2nd tribunal, only look at the fact that the correct legal process had been followed & not that just someone did not agree with the decision?

NedS

In my experience, PIP tribunals are pretty good. Even if the appellant is not very good at explaining how their condition affects them (so have not provided the information the tribunal needs to make their decision), the tribunal panel are highly experienced at probing and asking the appellant how their condition affects them, using examples, to get that information.

These guys do this all day long so they know what they are doing. I've supported a few people at tribunal and on the majority of occasions have not had to say or offer anything as the panel have done an excellent job of establishing the facts for themselves, and once they feel they have enough evidence to make a decision will end proceedings swiftly, discuss briefly and deliver their decision.

I should add that I've only witnessed tribunals of people I believed clearly met the conditions to be awarded sufficient points for an award, so do not have any experience of unsuccessful appeals, but I would imagine the process is the same just the outcome isn't what the appellant wanted.

leamingtonspaceman

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043415#Comment_82043415

Yes, this is why the first tribunal decision was set aside. It was set aside because the tribunal erred in law and my wife highlighted why and the case law to support this.

The judge looking at it agreed and so this is why she has to go through another tribunal.

marcia_

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043594#Comment_82043594

so she is educated 🤷

leamingtonspaceman

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043276#Comment_82043276

Yes, they are strange.

The judge has brought into question how many days there are in a week by saying you can't be in pain for 4-5 days a week because there aren't enough days in the week.

I know that's probably hard to believe for anyone reading this, but that is what he stated in his reasons.

It's also ludicrous that the judge said that attending the tribunal was another reason to award her zero points. You HAVE to attend the tribunal.

My wife has severe endometriosis… and I mean SEVERE. This affects almost every aspect of her life negatively. She also suffers from and is diagnosed with suicidal depression and ideation, is diagnosed with ADHD and has many problems organising her life. She was asked why she hasn't had private counselling? She said it's cost prohibitive because it's about £150 a session but in his notes the judge used this as another reason to award zero points. The judge who dismissed the tribunals decision upheld my wife's point that you cannot dismiss a claimants medical conditions simply because they don't seek treatment for them. There is case law to support this.

She is dreadful at budgeting. I have to deal with all of our finances. But the judge and the DWP constantly reiterate that she can't be because she worked in a post office until 2023.

The judges statement of reasons concludes that my wife cannot have problems budgeting because she went to school and received an education. She also can't possibly struggle with budgeting because she has a bank account.

Endometriosis affects my wife's toileting needs. But the panel and the judge dismissed this because she has a driving license so must do long car journeys. They also said that having a passport gives her the opportunity to travel so must also mean she can't struggle with toileting needs. They were basically saying that anyone with my wife's health issues would not have a bank account, a driving licence or a passport.

My wife does drive, but literally has to use a satnav to go anywhere even if she's been there before.

The panel had evidence that my wife wears incontinence pants and buys them from Amazon. But this was dismissed because she doesn't get them on prescription.

My wife has severe hyperhidrosis. She sweats excessively. Her hands are almost always wet and this results in her dropping things. Holding a kettle or a saucepan is really dangerous for her. The judge asked her why she doesn't wear gloves? If she does wear gloves, she gets sores on her hands but because that isn't in her medical records then it was dismissed.

The judge who set the decision aside specifically stated that all of my wife's supporting evidence was ignored.

The panel and the judge were not at all skilled in asking questions as far as I could see.

At the end of the tribunal when I was allowed to speak, the judge asked me "Tell us why you think your wife is depressed?"

My wife needs a LOT of prompting from me to do everyday things. The panel ascertained that my wife has a wardrobe so must have organisational skills.

The judge also dismissed much of the medical evidence from her GP notes because she had taken excerpts from those notes to support each descriptor.

To be quite honest, the judge appeared to have no knowledge at all of how PIP works. It seemed that his approach was that if you have something wrong with you, you have your meds, aids, adaptations, support etc so that means you can do what you say you can't, so you don't qualify for PIP.