WCA next week ,supporting evidence.

Crazydiamond wrote:

Although you may not be able to walk 50 metres, if you can manually propel a wheelchair more than 50 metres even if you do not use one, you will fail to satisfy the mobilising descriptor which may give you entry to the support group

Given that the wording on the ESA50 with respect to this descriptor states "if you ususally use one" or words to that effect (I don't have an ESA50 to hand at this moment in time) couldn't it be argued that what you are lead to believe on the ESA50 and what is actually the case is totally different and is misleading and thus cause for a complaint.

Or does that fact that the ESA50 lulls you into believing that you're being assessed on regularly using one item while you are actually assessed on something totally different i.e. an imaginary wheelchair is of no consequence?

Has any MP soptted this anomally and looked into it or am I seeing something that doesn't really matter as it's irrelevant what's on the ESA50 and what goes on at the WCA?

i struggle to walk short distances, and i am unable to use such aids as a maual wheelchair, crutches or a stick. i have a problem with carpel tunnel syndrome, and affects both hands, using crutches or stick ,causes problems . i have paperwork to prove this , could this be used as evidence at my WCA.

Gareth wrote:

Crazydiamond wrote:

Although you may not be able to walk 50 metres, if you can manually propel a wheelchair more than 50 metres even if you do not use one, you will fail to satisfy the mobilising descriptor which may give you entry to the support group

Given that the wording on the ESA50 with respect to this descriptor states "if you ususally use one" or words to that effect (I don't have an ESA50 to hand at this moment in time) couldn't it be argued that what you are lead to believe on the ESA50 and what is actually the case is totally different and is misleading and thus cause for a complaint.

Or does that fact that the ESA50 lulls you into believing that you're being assessed on regularly using one item while you are actually assessed on something totally different i.e. an imaginary wheelchair is of no consequence?

Has any MP soptted this anomally and looked into it or am I seeing something that doesn't really matter as it's irrelevant what's on the ESA50 and what goes on at the WCA?

There are many discrepancies between the ESA50 and the ESA Regs, and some of them have been picked up in upper tribunal decisions (for example, CE/2373/2009, coping with social situations).

So I would presume that you would have an argument on appeal if you are affected by such discrepancies, which has lead to the misinterpretation of your evidence.