DWP will NOT look at New Evidence !

Ok Gordon

Thank you for the clarification of the items mentioned.

My medical condition is as it was at the time claimed in the June application. So anything I am asking to be award then in June is what I am appealing on.

I mentioned my health getting worse, but I should have already scored the 12 points in June rather than 0. They obviously agree now scoring me 11 and 14 points.

Will think about what you said and see what the response of my MPs office who are also keen for the matter to be resolved and decide from there.

You have been a great help as allways.

Cipolar wrote: Ok Gordon

Thank you for the clarification of the items mentioned.

My medical condition is as it was at the time claimed in the June application. So anything I am asking to be award then in June is what I am appealing on.

I mentioned my health getting worse, but I should have already scored the 12 points in June rather than 0. They obviously agree now scoring me 11 and 14 points.

Will think about what you said and see what the response of my MPs office who are also keen for the matter to be resolved and decide from there.

You have been a great help as allways.

Hi C,

This is only a guest appearance as I was browsing the boards. (Although I hope to be back soon )

I read your query and remembered that I had answered a similar query some time ago : HERE

Hope it helps as the member in question was having similar problems !

bro58

Sorry for confusion, I meant the statements to be SEPERATE, so not to contradict.

1/ The statement that my claim in June represents my health today was meant to DEMONSTRATE that the APPEAL can be decided upon ALL THE INFORMATION they had then and now and they have altered to 11 and 14 points. Therefore I UNDERSTOOD your comments about how the appeal and the DWP can only consider my health as it was then, which I have estimate at 14 and 16 points.

2/ The extra medical information sent by my mental health team gives medical evidence which on question 3 looking after yourself gives me 4 points. This is the evidence that they say they will not look at when my MPs office asked them to look at it again.

3/ When I described my condition as worsening, I cannot get any more benefit than high of both which is what I claimed initially and am only 1 point off. HOWEVER I do realise why the 2 statements were contradictory.

I noticed a comment by Bro on here who describes a similar case and this is pointing out that the information given by the DWP is not in line with the DWP guidelines on wasting tax payers money with cases that can be easily revised, when its clear a claimant is going to win their case.

I will send some of that information to my MP and it seems its another example of the DWP not following its own guidelines.

Thankyou for your help