DLA APPEAL RESULT

Hi

Well I had my DLA appeal yesterday NOT a good result failed on all counts.

The panel decided that even with all the pain I suffered , which they agreed I was suffering from and had sympathy the help my wife was giving me getting out of bed / bath , out of the chair , putting on my socks , shoes , helping me out of the car etc because of my arthritus of my knees and back.

They were not interested in my pain and asked me not to keep refering to pain.

They asked if my wife was not there and she was in hospital so I was on my own / would I be able even if in servere pain manage to do all those things by myself as a last resort!!
I had to be truthful and conceded I could if a last resort ie house was on fire.
So they decided that the help I have from my wife was just a convienient way to reduce / mitigate my pain and therefore I didnt meet any critera !!

Where I think there was an err in law was on the mobility claim they did not ask any question about that non what so ever. At the very end of the questions I asked what about the mobility ? and the chairman said its to late now its all finished and we had to leave the room.
When we came back into the room there was a notice on our table appeal refused concering the care award, nothing about mobility!!
My rep contacted the clerk to the court in the afternoon and ask why there was nothing concerning mobility and the clerk checked with the chairman and he said the mobility also failed also and he would issue anothe statement later. This seems wrong to me as our submission on mobility we thought was weighted in our favor. The walking test distances and comments by the doctor were wrong and full of inconsistancies . The distance / speed / time and manner all met the critera.

Is there anything I and my rep can do with this situation?

Many thanks

Mel b

Hi Mel,

I'm sorry that the tribunal did not find in your favour

You now have one month (from the date on the decision letter) to request a Statement of Reasons from the Tribunal service and a further month (from the date on that Statement) to apply for permission to apply to the 2nd tier tribunal. However, you can only take this further if you can show that there has been an 'Error in Law', otherwise you have reached the end of the road regarding this claim.

Tribunals – Requesting a Statement of Reasons

What is an Error of Law?

The refusal to consider your pain might be considered an Error in Law, but this needs specialist advice. Your rep might be able to provide this advice or point you in the direction of someone who can.

Your only other option is to make a claim for PIP if you think you meet the criteria.

Help for PIP claimants

If you have any further questions, please return to this topic to ask them, it really helps us to keep everything in one place. You will find it easily in future if you bookmark it/make it a favourite on your web browser now

Hi
You can only appeal a First Tier Tribunal decision if there has been an error in law.

www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/help-for-claim...ppeals-faq#Appeal100

The first step is to write to the Tribunals Service and ask for a statement of reasons.
Then you and your representative would have to look at these and see if there has been an error in law.
Then you would need to ask for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal.

Mrs H beat me to it, I need to type faster

Hello

Well I got my statement of reasons today.

The area I was contesting was the Mobiity virtually unable to walk.

The history of this was concerning the walking test carried out by the DWP doctor.

The submission relied on the fact that the doctor guessed the distance at 180yds when it was actually 124 yds.
He also made an error in the time it took me to walk this distance and missed off a full one minute.

This meant I was walking at nearly 5 mph (near jogging speed) which was impossible as he stated I started off limping and limping and staggering at the end of the test. There were other inconsistances too which were obvious in the medical report.

I walked 124 yds in 2.15 sec which when worked out was slow and manner limping and staggering.

At the appeal nothing was mentioned about this test and no clarification was sort concerning any distance I could walk / any rest required and in what manner! The whole area was in my opinion side stepped I believe to save face for the doctor and the DWP who failed to notice the errors.

The panel refused my care award fair enough and I had only one decision notice on the table when we came back and nothing concerning my mobility award.
My rep later in the day asked why there was no decision notice on the Mobility and the excuse was given, Oh! he failed that as well and the chairman will issue another notice later in the week.

When I got it all it said was Mobility Award refused !!

This is not in my books a reason, so I asked for SoR as my right as I can smell a rat!
Its like they dont want to visit this area and side stepped the area on purpose. I was not going to let them get away with it.

The SoR states Miss Rep my rep identified to us in her submissions the correct test for mobility component i.e. that the applicant must be unable or virtually unable to walk and that we had to consider distance, speed, time taken and the manner of the walking. She suggested on his behalf he could only walk short distances before he had to stop and rest, also she did not qualify how short or long these distances were. They never asked me any questions nor qualified anything.

Miss Rep raised criticisms of the doctor and the test and perceived contradictions in his report as to how far and how fast I could walk. We accept there are inconsistencies however in her own submission she put forward that the claimannt had revisited the locus of the test and had walked 124 yds in 2 min 15 secs. Because the test of ability to walk is multi factorial there is no absolute distance or time or sequellae that qualify it. A part that is from an absolute inability to walk.

In our view a yard per second over 124 yards is an indication, without anything else, and Miss Rep did not refer to the effect that such walk had had on the claimant that for the purposes of the regulations the claimant is able to walk and is not virtually unable to walk.

Gordon I believe is experianced in this area if I am correct so my question is . If the panel accept there were inconsistancies and could see the errors in the walking test how could they have reached their conclusion based on that information this must be error in law, a perverse decision.???

I would like to move this up to the next teir do you think I stand a chance moving this up ?

Thank you in anticipation hope you can help please.

Mel b