PIP, DLA and AA
If this is your first visit, check out the community guide. You will have to Join us or Sign in before you can post.

First lower tribunal Adjourned bias

tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
After reporting the success of my girlfriend's appeal after over two years I had my own tribunal and it ended badly due to my providing not enough medical data.
Do n t ask me why but i didn't see the tribunal 8n such a way as its like first applying for pip where you have to give the DWP access to your records.
In the tribunal you have to provide them again as part of your appeal I.e send the same notes the DWP sent you previously 9r see your doctors surgery for a new set which takes a while but may be more ap p ropriate than the ones the DWP chose to cherry pick from.
For some unknown reason I assumed the tribunal would have those n9te s the DWP had as it seemed crazy to expect a doctor to send yet another batch of notes it seems a serious burden to put on them again but that is what is required the tribunal do not get the notes from the DWP so like I sa8d you have to get them again or use the ones the DWP will have sent.
I did neither!
Basically i turned up to an angry tribunal member. The tension was strange I knew there was an issue when he waved my papers  above his head.
Anyway i got an adjournment aand a month to get the notes with a warning my pip award could be reduced.
I what was interesting was a show 9f bias towards the DWP I was asked to clarify a doctor date as there were two different ones. One I wrote myself one was supplied by the DWP as if from me but obviously copied with an error.
I clarified the date I put was correct and expected the DWP to be quizzed as to why their date was wrong but he asked ME why it was wrong on the DWP paper as if they are incapable of errors!
He was incredulous that I suggested it was copied wrongly as I stood by my date that I wrote myself.
He actually waved them over his head as if head caught me I n a l8e.
He also produced so m e Info I sent and said this got to me this morning.. thereby revealing that my evidence had been split up and separated and what els3 might h ave been missing?

So I saw some bias in the tribunal member assuming I was at fault no matter what date was correct despite only writing one of the dates myself.
This is also proof of how accurately  the DWP record data.

I also saw proof that the tribunal service is not handling the evidence we send in in a reliable timely manner getting it to the judges with evidence they held for months arriving piecemeal.

I also noticed the recorder was observing the action rather than record by what was said so I  intend on asking for a transcript and officially complain8ng about that tribunal panel.
Luckily they will not be involved next time.

I know this tribunal were criticized by a higher tier judge for not being inquisitive enough in another case which went on to succeed.

So there's another outcome: the adjournment





Replies

  • poppy123456poppy123456 Community champion Posts: 21,139 Disability Gamechanger
    Hi,

    DWP send HMCTS the bundle, which you should have received a copy of and in that bundle is everything you send DWP, which will include the original form and th assessment report.

    As you've had a warning that you could lose the award you already have then you'll need to get some face to face advice from an agency near you and you'll need to take all of your paperwork to them for them to have a look through it. If you continue with the hearing then the next time you appear it's possible you won't have any award at the end and that's why you've been given that warning.
    Community champion and proud winner of the 2019 empowering others award. This award was given for supporting disabled people and their families for the benefit advice i have given to members here on the community.
  • CockneyRebelCockneyRebel Community champion Posts: 5,259 Disability Gamechanger
    As poppy has said you should have received a copy of the bundle. It is your responsibility to check that all the relevant evidence is present and add any further relevant evidence is added. This can seem like a huge task, sometimes hundreds of pages need to be gone through so that you can present your very best case to the tribunal. 
    Be all you can be, make  every day count. Namaste
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Member - under moderation Posts: 4,932 Disability Gamechanger
    Waving appeal papers above your head will never be appropriate but I’m not sure I see bias in the rest of it. In particular you don’t say if the DWP had a presenting officer present. If they didn’t then they asked you to explain the discrepancy because you were the only one there who possibly could. 

    You are absolutely accurate in asserting HMCTS is not handling evidence in a timely or appropriate manner at present. It’s absolutely the worst most of us have seen it in over 30 years but then the flip side of that of course is that if the first that a tribunal panel has seen of some of the paperwork is on the day then it’s easy to misinterpret and you should perhaps cut them some slack rather than rushing to make accusations of bias. 

    You obviously aren’t familiar with how tribunals operate as there is not and never has been a “recorder”. You’re likely confusing this with the role of clerk to the tribunal. Their role involves only typing up any summary decision on the day. The notes of what has taken place at the hearing are recorded in a record of proceedings, which is what the judge is writing as you speak. 

    Finally I’m afraid it’s highly unlikely that your tribunal were criticised by an upper tribunal judge. Maybe a panel operating out of that venue or consisting of one member of your panel. All three? Very unlikely indeed. I’d like to see evidence of that. Not least because the outcome of the UT decision would usually go via the regional tribunal judge and the fallout would likely be that the same panel would never sit as a group again other than in an emergency.
  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    The dwp were present, i accept both dates were from me but if they are making the point and want an explanation and seeing it was the only question asked, i think they should have pursued for the answer with the dwp.
    If ii have to defend  under threat of being deemed unreliable from the start that  my date is correct that i wrote myself then why shouldnt the dwp be tarnished too?
    The bias is in that this benefits the dwp unfairly and legitimises their  many mistakes and innaccuracies from their assessments and its interpretation afterwards.
    That is the data they manipulate and if the tribunal assumes what the dwp submits is writ in stone and any errors are from the claimant then that is bias for want of the correct term.
    I have no doubt tribunals regularly  follow the dwp line. Ive seen a few from the poinnty end. Not from the  inner workings but its a greasy machine populated by those remote looking people  who know we are compelled to enter the web but never help us out ofit. There are no layman simplifications to aid the unfamiliar and that is a failing if they are going to judge us knowing we neither know our right nor comprehend our true situation beyond ourselves sat there looking at three members of a class that wouldnt care to mix with us any other time.

  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Member - under moderation Posts: 4,932 Disability Gamechanger
    The mistake here is in thinking you’re in an adversarial setting when it’s only inquisitorial. It’s not a court room drama or a forum for attributing blame or tarnishing the reputation of anyone. The tribunal only have to hear the evidence and then determine findings of fact on the balance of probabilities. They then apply the law to the facts as they see them and off you go. 

    They don’t have to go round the room asking the same question of every party and a failure to do that would rarely be evidence of bias. They asked you. They heard your answer and decided they could draw a conclusion based on that answer. That’s within their gift. Reading your posts together it doesn’t strike me that anything took place other than routine inquiries which led to an outcome you don’t agree with. With a success rate currently of 75/76% for all PIP appeals you’ll have a hard time convincing most reasonable people that tribunals accept anything from DWP as set in stone. Overwhelmingly that is statistically demonstrable as simply not true. 

    As regards simplifying things for lay people you have the Disabilty Rights Handbook; goodness knows how many brilliant web sites; numerous publications from HMCTS itself and good old fashioned face to face advice and representation. There is absolutely no reason at all that a well prepared appellant should not enter a tribunal  room and have a level playing field given the sheer range of choices. 

    As far as referring to social classes concerned it doesn't really stand up to analysis. Judges? Maybe so. Not least since Ernie Ryder decided recruiting barristers was the way to go. Medical professionals and DQMs? Not all. The range and diversity is huge.

    I’d suggest it is better to stick to the facts of your case as accusations of bias and class prejudice do leave what I hope is an unintentional impression that you are the person who believes that any decision which goes against you is evidence of one or both of those things. 

  • skullcapskullcap Member - under moderation Posts: 182 Courageous
    As regards simplifying things for lay people you have the Disabilty Rights Handbook; goodness knows how many brilliant web sites; numerous publications from HMCTS itself and good old fashioned face to face advice and representation. There is absolutely no reason at all that a well prepared appellant should not enter a tribunal  room and have a level playing field given the sheer range of choices. 
    I agree entirely with what you are saying. However us humans are of many differences. No doubt there are these marvellous publications and along with what is available on the internet should make a claimant feel comfortable and confident in arguing their corner in a Tribunal setting. However there are many that would not have the capability to absorb all of that information never mind use it. As for independent advice, that is a hit or miss matter as to how good it is. Representation is seriously lacking in many parts of the UK. I too have looked at the link for 'advicelocal' which in my area only lists AgeUK and the CAB, neither of whom offer representation. 
    Many claimants are like me when up against the DWP and the Tribunal, they simply try to 'wing it on half a prayer'!
  • poppy123456poppy123456 Community champion Posts: 21,139 Disability Gamechanger
    skullcap said:
    As regards simplifying things for lay people you have the Disabilty Rights Handbook; goodness knows how many brilliant web sites; numerous publications from HMCTS itself and good old fashioned face to face advice and representation. There is absolutely no reason at all that a well prepared appellant should not enter a tribunal  room and have a level playing field given the sheer range of choices. 
    I agree entirely with what you are saying. However us humans are of many differences. No doubt there are these marvellous publications and along with what is available on the internet should make a claimant feel comfortable and confident in arguing their corner in a Tribunal setting. However there are many that would not have the capability to absorb all of that information never mind use it. As for independent advice, that is a hit or miss matter as to how good it is. Representation is seriously lacking in many parts of the UK. I too have looked at the link for 'advicelocal' which in my area only lists AgeUK and the CAB, neither of whom offer representation. 
    Many claimants are like me when up against the DWP and the Tribunal, they simply try to 'wing it on half a prayer'!

    Strange that because Yadnad and twonker always said the exact same thing you just said....
    Community champion and proud winner of the 2019 empowering others award. This award was given for supporting disabled people and their families for the benefit advice i have given to members here on the community.
  • cristobalcristobal Member Posts: 965 Disability Gamechanger
    @poppy123456 - I did ask Skullcap about this on another topic but it seems that Yadnad/Twonker are different posters.

    However, I agree that the coincidence is remarkable as the content is identical...
  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    Believe me with my partners apoeals lasting nearly 3 years and my own nearing two years ive read and read here and other places.
    My town offers no representation and ive scoured it looking.
    This is an examole of a question that I knew the answer to but which the tribunal twisted into a blatant lie and then accepted their own reasoning based on their own  ignorance of the subject:
    Being tachycardic with a too fast heart rate i queried why the DWP stated it was 45 bpm without checking in any way, when its usually 100-125 bpm at rest?  The tribunal response was 100 bpm is normal and the bpm was BREATHeS PER MINUTE!
    I said if it was breaths per minute is it still normal  at 45? She said yes.
    In actual fact 12-20 is normal and 45 would be serious hyperventilation but to say that just gives credence to what is a simple falsehood because the DWP were tslking about my heart so what do you do with that? Is it an error i can use?
    I said hiw did they come to that figure and she replied they must have counted while talking to you!
    I seriously knew i wasnt getting a result if this is what is deciding the result.
    Since when is bpm about breathes?
    Since when do they count your ... you get my point.
    But how do i turn that to my advantage?
  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    When i explained i cant carry heavy or hot stuff in the kitchen safely i she said the DWP say you can use an aid, what aid? I said, she said "a stool."
    Everything i said they had a pointless answer for but they were clearly thinking they had caught me out with this logic that a stool can help you carry things. Or is any solution to carrying.
    Or bpm meant breaths and various others.
    Are these errors in law i can use?
  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    One more thing they said everything i answer has to relate to the time of assessment in 2018
    They then asked questions from 2017 2013  stuff about now etc is it fair to limit me to 2018 then ask stuff from other times?
    It seemed like my answer to a question from 2013 would then have to be adjusted to 2018 for their benefit.
    As an example: a cardiac nurse recording that i said i felt okay that day i saw her in 2017?
    Yet my own GP said last year i cant walk 25 metres. Which they ignored entirely.
  • poppy123456poppy123456 Community champion Posts: 21,139 Disability Gamechanger
    Carrying items around the kitchen is not part of the PIP descriptors. 

    Community champion and proud winner of the 2019 empowering others award. This award was given for supporting disabled people and their families for the benefit advice i have given to members here on the community.
  • chiariedschiarieds Community champion Posts: 5,252 Disability Gamechanger
    Hi @tru88le - There has been a most unfortunate misunderstanding of some of your medical readings, i.e. bpm being beats per minute, however I can't see how this is an error in law, nor the incorrect assumption that a stool was used in carrying heavy items in your kitchen.
    As Poppy has been at pains to say, carrying [heavy or hot stuff] in your kitchen is not one of the descriptors. The question is, why was time in your Tribunal sadly wasted in trying to correct information if it wasn't relevant to the PIP descriptors? A simple, without being a challenging answer should have sufficed. Then you might have had more time to say how your disabilities affect you in activities of daily living &/or mobility to further your PIP claim.
  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    Thanks, the reason i wasted that time and I agree it was wasted, was the tribunal were using the stool being an aid as being a reasonable solution to why I cant prepare meals reliably and safely for myself which did relate directly to a pip question.
    They directed the question and so must have put some significance on the answer which is why I was forced to query the dwp logic snd theirs relating to the stool.
  • poppy123456poppy123456 Community champion Posts: 21,139 Disability Gamechanger
    A poorly presented case often leads to refusal and this could be what happened here.
    Community champion and proud winner of the 2019 empowering others award. This award was given for supporting disabled people and their families for the benefit advice i have given to members here on the community.
  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    edited February 12
    Surely not answering was not an option that would be any benefit to my case..
    I hoped it might be an error because they incorrectly argued that a stool was a valid solution to carrying heavy or hot items.
    Of course people want redress for innaccurate comments by the dwp, as this is the basis of how they decided the award and its these falsehoods such as the bpm relating to breaths not heart rate that caused a decision to be justified and then rejustified by the tribunal if they are building a picture of a healthy heart rate and breathing rate it undermines those questions where the descriptors focus on how i manage to do things. For example if i say i cant do a thing they are then able to use that false picture they invented as grounds to disagree with me and they did do that as if im contradicting myself or saying one thing that conflicts with something else I said.
    And they did indeed use these falsehoids to undermine answers i gave relating to descriptors. But only the things writ in error by the dwp i was careful enough that they never used something i said myself to contradict myself it was always against put against some dwp statement that i was certain was wrong. Such as the bpm wh8ch was related to my heart rate, I knew it was the dwp probably wouldnt disagree only that tribunal member believed it was related to breath rate, not a doctor in this land would consider a bpm number to relate to breathing!
    But you think I should sacrifice the points riding on that rather than waste time? Remember they do the questions all it would achieve if i let it go would be a shorter hearing. Its not going to add time for other evidence unless the claimant was running the show.
    If they state bpm relates to breathing rate on the dwp assessment then this is an error wether in law or judgement i dont know but its wrong, if that is then used to to counter a claim i make in a descriptor then its an error that has wrongfully been used against me and caused me to lose points for that question.
    Obviously you cant query every error but if they try to use a fact supplied by the dwp or justify something the dwp said or even explain on behalf of the dwp then its bias as they would not do the same for me.
    If the tribunal are using such wrong facts then they have made a serious error in my opinion and you have no choice but waste time arguing that the basis of their point is based on a dwp statement that is factually wrong, not only numerically wrong which was my initial reason  but factually as 5o what bpm pertains to..
    Im not wasting time im trying to save a valuable couple of points from being lost due to what is a crass and obvious error.
    They choose the questions  its clear that the tribunal  using the dwp's evidence when that evidence is  incorrect and it is going to lose me that questions points if i let it go and dont tell them why i think it is based on innaccurate facts and will be wrong im just going to lose.
    According to their criteria they are looking at it afresh in which case why are they even defending data the dwp supplied ? Or considering it at all.
    Also it is their job to look for other descriptors that apply If they disagree that i satisfy a descriptor but it would take too long to do that and they didnt because it would only help me. 
     I know a Judge Poynter said if a descriptor didnt apply they are obliged to make sure that there are no others that do. I cant be expected to cover everything on my own.
    Like ins5antly produce alternative descriptors to satify the question when they discount my own on such unfair grounds.
    So that is why time was wasted its a matter of let a falsehoid stand and accept a stool can helo me carry something heavy or concur with their ridiculous assertions  and thus lose the points for preparing food  or pursue the error and ask them how a stool can help.
    A judge said when an aid is indicated by the dwp it should be specified what aid so i asked them if they agreed with the dwp  i can do this with an aid they should state what aid. That is when they said "a stool"!
    If you let these things go to save time for other descriptord you will quickly find that any time you saved arguing a point will only serve to give them a longer lunch break not give you time for other questions.
    Also there is no set time you dont have a clue how much time is remaining so to think your saving time better spent on other things is kidding yourself it doesnt work like that. I mean you would have to know exactly what time remained and  what happens in that time is out of your control so you lose a stack of points rather than argue and just when you think you have time to give them some good answers now they say thank you go and wait outside for ten minutes.
    Do you get me that its a bad idea to allow them to rob you off points unfairly on the presumption that you will have time to redress the gains they made later?
    For one thing every point is crucial you cant sacrifice points in the hope you will have more time for other questions later.
    If i had done that i would probably have left two minutes earlier it would not have given ME any more time for anything.

  • chiariedschiarieds Community champion Posts: 5,252 Disability Gamechanger
    Hmm - preparing a meal is about making a simple meal; perhaps preparing veg to be peeled & chopped, with or without an aid, or that you just might use a microwave oven rather than a gas hob if you were unsafe to use the latter safely. Perhaps they were thinking a perching stool might assist you in being able to make a simple meal? In my assessor's report they recommended a perching stool, whilst I had said my pain increased upon sitting, which is why I didn't use one in my kitchen. I ignored this comment in my Mandatory Reconsideration. You needed to have said where you might gain points rather than answering further at length. The tribunal were just trying to find out more, & sadly you missed the opportunity.
  • skullcapskullcap Member - under moderation Posts: 182 Courageous
    cristobal said:
    @poppy123456 - I did ask Skullcap about this on another topic but it seems that Yadnad/Twonker are different posters.

    However, I agree that the coincidence is remarkable as the content is identical...
    Sincerely I have no idea what point you are trying to make. There are hundreds of claimants that wing it at a Tribunal through lack of knowledge and no representation. Tru88le appears to fall into that camp. In an ideal world we would be allowed to claim Legal Aid in order to have the best advice and representation that money could buy. But unfortunately that is a pipe dream.
    Anyhow we work with what we have and hope that it is good enough some you win some you lose. Reality is more important that a dream..
  • skullcapskullcap Member - under moderation Posts: 182 Courageous
    chiarieds said:
     Then you might have had more time to say how your disabilities affect you in activities of daily living &/or mobility to further your PIP claim.
    Wouldn't all of that information be on the claim form that the claimant filled out which was in front of the Tribunal members?
  • poppy123456poppy123456 Community champion Posts: 21,139 Disability Gamechanger
    skullcap said:
    chiarieds said:
     Then you might have had more time to say how your disabilities affect you in activities of daily living &/or mobility to further your PIP claim.
    Wouldn't all of that information be on the claim form that the claimant filled out which was in front of the Tribunal members?

    No, not always because a lot of the time claimants don't fill out the form with enough of information.
    Community champion and proud winner of the 2019 empowering others award. This award was given for supporting disabled people and their families for the benefit advice i have given to members here on the community.
  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    edited February 13
    @poppy123456
    I i suppose i was explaing some reasons why 8 cant prepare a s8mple meal which is a descriptor and thus wasnt wasting time answering it.
    You assumed i had digressed from sticking to the descriptors without knowing what question i was asked..
    So how does not being able to manage hot food safely not satisfy the descriptor?
    Carrying hot things isnt a descriptor but its part and parcel of cooking a simple meal safely which is.
    Unless food magically apoears on a plate at your house.


  • poppy123456poppy123456 Community champion Posts: 21,139 Disability Gamechanger
    That descriptor Is about opening packaging, peeling and chopping and serving food on a plate. It's doesn't consider your ability to carry things around the kitchen or to take the food to where it will be eaten.

    Why are you unable to use the stool as an aid?
    Community champion and proud winner of the 2019 empowering others award. This award was given for supporting disabled people and their families for the benefit advice i have given to members here on the community.
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Member - under moderation Posts: 4,932 Disability Gamechanger
    tru88le said:
    One more thing they said everything i answer has to relate to the time of assessment in 2018
    They then asked questions from 2017 2013  stuff about now etc is it fair to limit me to 2018 then ask stuff from other times?
    It seemed like my answer to a question from 2013 would then have to be adjusted to 2018 for their benefit.
    As an example: a cardiac nurse recording that i said i felt okay that day i saw her in 2017?
    Yet my own GP said last year i cant walk 25 metres. Which they ignored entirely.
    A tribunal are confined to basing their decision on what you were like on the date of decision. However, nothing prevents them from looking at evidence which pre or post dates that date if it enlightens them in some way about the main date under consideration. So, in short, yes, they were perfectly entitled to do as they did. No bias and no error of law. 
  • cristobalcristobal Member Posts: 965 Disability Gamechanger
    @skullcap said..'Sincerely I have no idea what point you are trying to make.'

    It doesn't actually matter so much but I just that I find it confusing when people post under different usernames...Skullcap,Yadnad, Twonker, Gruber and the like..

    If people look back through the forum they might not know these are all the same person - and assume that it's different people with the same opinion.

    That said you can choose whatever name you like - just confuses me that's all..

    Good luck ...
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Member - under moderation Posts: 4,932 Disability Gamechanger
    Two things to say.

    1 - people have previously connected @Yadnad to a poster on Rightsnet. I’ve no way of definitively confirming and nor could I care less but the circumstantial evidence points overwhelmingly in that direction. Interesting to note then that said Rightsnet poster very recently posted on there about a thread on here (not this one) and yet @Yadnad hasn’t been active on here since the middle of last year.

    2 - back on topic and directly addressed to @skullcap. I slightly disagree with your response. The amount of information required to successfully conduct an appeal is minimal and not really complex to the degree some professionals would perhaps prefer people to think but the concept of advice deserts has been explored recently and shown to be largely untrue. Whilst representation has reduced there is nothing to stop the sort of person you describe going to an agency which might not represent but would still be able to thoroughly prepare them. 

    3 - @tru88le you persist with an assumption that a tribunal is adversarial and this is leading you down dead end after dead end. The error you describe is an error of fact. You can only appeal further on an error of law. 

    However, that aside, it’s also not necessarily a material fact. Okay, so you’re tachycardic. Which specific activities of daily living do you think that would prevent you from doing reliably? That’s the only relevant issue. Have you, for example, any anecdotal evidence of fainting whilst cooking or dressing or bathing? 
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Member - under moderation Posts: 4,932 Disability Gamechanger
    I am intrigued that once again someone at Scope has edited a comment of mine which references the identify issue raised by @cristobal but not stated that my post was edited nor contacted me to explain why the rest of my post was not published. There was no breach of T&Cs; no offensive language and some evidence that dual identities are being used, which of course would be such a breach now I’ve looked it up. I was also on topic by referencing why an assertion was not an error of law. 

    Doesn’t look good.
  • Adrian_ScopeAdrian_Scope Administrator Posts: 7,605 Scope community team
    Hi @mikehughescq. I’m not aware of any edits. And while some of your posts have been pending for longer than we’d like, I’ve looked through and made sure any of your posts left in the queue have now been posted in their entirety. 
    Senior Community Partner
    Scope

    If you have a few minutes to spare, we'd appreciate your feedback on our online community.
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Member - under moderation Posts: 4,932 Disability Gamechanger
    @Adrian_Scope thank you very much for the explanation. Much appreciated. 
  • FlorineFlorine Member Posts: 37 Connected
    As regards simplifying things for lay people you have the Disabilty Rights Handbook; goodness knows how many brilliant web sites; numerous publications from HMCTS itself and good old fashioned face to face advice and representation. There is absolutely no reason at all that a well prepared appellant should not enter a tribunal  room and have a level playing field given the sheer range of choices. 


    On a side note, do we have most of these listed somewhere?  I have to admit that I was unaware of most of these in the run-up to my caree's tribunal, and obviously I wasn't using the correct search terms on Google to come up with all the brilliant websites :(

  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    Actually no. These things may exist and armour claimants with the wit and guile to trounce the dwp but the reality is you cant prepare for a hostile tribunal that argues with your every point and sweeps over your answers with another question leaving your attention a step behind as you realise that your point abiut not being capable of even reaching the trolleys never mind shopping in a supermarket has been reinterpreted as "so your okay shopping while leaning on a trolley?" As you protest that  your attention is now forced into defending why their suggestion to use a stool in sa kitchen to help prepare a simple meal doesnt help you to carry anything if the issue is one of using your arms.
    They categorically refuse to accept that their stupid ignorant suggestions can be wrong and you kniw they have judged accordingly..
    It takes some serious  effort to turn 10 points into zero and destroy your claim entirely.
    Claimants are never going to stand a chance against tribunals.
    I would suggest first of all forget all notions that the tribunal are going to give you a fair and fresh hearing and remember they are going to much more hostile than the dwp were at your assessment.
  • poppy123456poppy123456 Community champion Posts: 21,139 Disability Gamechanger
    tru88le said:

    Claimants are never going to stand a chance against tribunals.
    I would suggest first of all forget all notions that the tribunal are going to give you a fair and fresh hearing and remember they are going to much more hostile than the dwp were at your assessment.

    Sorry but i disagree, the majority of people that post here have successful Tribunal outcomes and the panel are mostly understanding.

    You were warned that you could lose everything you already had when they adjourned the previous hearing. If that was me then i would have thought twice before proceeding any further. If you hadn't have been warned then it would have been totally different.
    Community champion and proud winner of the 2019 empowering others award. This award was given for supporting disabled people and their families for the benefit advice i have given to members here on the community.
  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    edited February 15
    Why would it have been different?
    Why would such a warning make you think twice about proceeding considering that the warning applies to any tribunal?
    To me the warning was regarding the evidence as it stood and only if it remained  to be heard without the missing evidence.
    They have no right to tell you going to lose before the tribunal.
    Without the extra evidence and without any oral statement by me you seem to believe it better to abandon all hope than proceed with a valid claim..
    Personally i think its grossly unfair to predict a verdict  or rather prejudice the hearing in leiu of hearing the evidence!
    Worse still to pack in your case because of a threat.
    What your suggesting is the last thing people should do.
    Now you might say well it did go badly but it isnt over yet.
    Ive been in this position with someone else and consequent appeals rejectedt till finally an upper tier judge could see it for what it was and the appeal was allowed and then won after nearly three years.
    So i would say ignore those who tell you to roll over give in and if you have a valid claim keep fighting it.

  • poppy123456poppy123456 Community champion Posts: 21,139 Disability Gamechanger
    They don't warn you for no reason. You had the warning because there was a risk you could lose everything you already had. Most likely the warning was because there could have been a contradiction in the evidence you sent. You took the risk the minute you walked through the door to the hearing

    Why do they no right to tell you that you could lose at the start of a hearing? they have warn people if this is likely to happen. They have to give that claimant a chance to go to think about what they want to do, so they adjourn the hearing.

    You can't appeal a decision because you think it's wrong. Sorry but i'm out but i wish you good luck.
    Community champion and proud winner of the 2019 empowering others award. This award was given for supporting disabled people and their families for the benefit advice i have given to members here on the community.
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Member - under moderation Posts: 4,932 Disability Gamechanger
    tru88le said:
    Why would it have been different?
    Why would such a warning make you think twice about proceeding considering that the warning applies to any tribunal?
    To me the warning was regarding the evidence as it stood and only if it remained  to be heard without the missing evidence.
    They have no right to tell you going to lose before the tribunal.
    Without the extra evidence and without any oral statement by me you seem to believe it better to abandon all hope than proceed with a valid claim..
    Personally i think its grossly unfair to predict a verdict  or rather prejudice the hearing in leiu of hearing the evidence!
    Worse still to pack in your case because of a threat.
    What your suggesting is the last thing people should do.
    Now you might say well it did go badly but it isnt over yet.
    Ive been in this position with someone else and consequent appeals rejectedt till finally an upper tier judge could see it for what it was and the appeal was allowed and then won after nearly three years.
    So i would say ignore those who tell you to roll over give in and if you have a valid claim keep fighting it.

    They are not telling you that you’re going to lose and it’s not about rights. They are legally obligated to tell you that, as the evidence stands, you are likely to end up worse than you started. It’s not pre-determining the outcome at all. It’s demonstrating fairness to all and alerting you to their starting point not their ending point. As you would no doubt complain equally loudly if they hadn’t previewed the papers and formed an initial view I doubt anyone here would see an issue with that.

    The reasonable expectation at that point was that you pause and seek advice. Again, an act of fairness not bias. You sought advice here at minimum and that advice was to at minimum pause and her face to face advice. You elected to do neither. You say there’s no representation in your area. That may be so but it doesn’t stop the seeking of advice. 

    I have proceeded with several cases where a warning was given because I am qualified through training and experience to know the strength of what we were about to present and, in many cases, already had submitted. We won. 

    You were not in a position to know that and thus far your confidence in your own case; evidence and presentation skills remains undimmed in the face of each failure. The optimism and resilience is to be admired but each failure is characterised as a failure or bias of some other party whilst your case, evidence and presentation skills don’t appear to have been subject to any testing or challenge by any third party face to face advice. You are right to say that your case is not over but on none of this thread thus far has any case been made for an award of points at all let alone an error of law  

    That’s ultimately the key point. Starting multiple threads on slightly different angles of the same issue is unlikely to change that. 
  • cristobalcristobal Member Posts: 965 Disability Gamechanger
    @tru88le - you obviously have a poor opinion of the tribunal process - rightly or wrongly - but I do feel that you are letting that cloud you judgement here...

    The tribunal advised you that you might end up being worse off which you interpret as them threatening you. Speaking personally I don't see it as a threat and, as @mikehughescq has said, I would have sought advice as to the merits of my case and whether to continue or stick with what I've got. 

    You're back to square one now because, as far as I know, you can't appeal a verdict simply because you don't agree with it.

    I'd still be inclined to get professional advice before proceeding further. Perhaps re-applying if you have fresh evidence...
  • tru88letru88le Member - under moderation Posts: 87 Courageous
    Most likely the warning was because there could have been a contradiction in the evidence you sent. 

    You mean the two dates differing from an apoointment 10 years ago that i mentioned? 
    Well if that took my entire award away it will say in the SOR wont it. Shouod be a very short SOR if your correct. I think your forgetting this was the following tribunal and that point was now irrelevant.
    Also i did say it was my submission that i verified , technically i cant be responsible for the dwp misstating a date unless it was in my hand which it wasnt. Even if it had its not a game changing error and if they had used it i would have used it against them as overemphasising the importance of a minor slip of the pen as judges are allowed to do to cover their date errors which doesnt alter a decision if they date wrong so they cent decide.against you for a mismatched date when the correct one would change nothing material to the case.
    So I think it wont be because of that whatsoever.

  • Chloe_ScopeChloe_Scope Administrator Posts: 10,679 Scope community team
    This thread has been closed, and will not be opened again. This is due to breaking the Terms & Conditions and the Community Guidelines.

    Please use this as a reminder to everybody to be respectful of everyone. Here's a post about commenting on the content, not the contributor you can read.

    We want to ensure the community is a place for everyone and that everyone feels supported and safe while using the site.

    It is completely up to members how they take guidance and a reminder that they do have a choice. It's also important to respect other views. 

    If you would like to discuss this further or need further support then please email the community team: [email protected]
    Community Partner
    Scope

    Tell us what you think?
    Complete our feedback form to help us to improve your community.
This discussion has been closed.