This topic was closed on 03/08/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

Keep on fighting ragsrule, you will get there in the end Good advice also Ruby, that would have been our next move if the appeal was rejected but I think even they knew that to place my wife in a work related group without as much as a medical was totally wrong!!

Oh, as for debt advice, there is a fantastic charity which used to be called the Consumer Credit Counselling Service (CCCS) but I think they are now partners with a place called "StepChange" who will do an income and expenditure budget plan with you, leave you with a decent amount of money to live on each month whilst at the same time contact all the people you owe money to and tell them, yes TELL THEM (not ask) they have to stop any interest they are charging and they will have to accept a certain amount of money each month and those people will not be allowed to contact you again until the "budget plan" expires. If your circumstances haven't changed once the budget plan has finished, you'll simply enter into another budget plan and no-one can contact you again, all the people you owe money to have to go through the CCCS again - I did this many years ago when I was working and was struggling with debt and the relief this charity gave me was a god send. Don't struggle with debt, contact these people http://www.stepchange.org/ and they will guide you every step of the way

Thanks for all the support and comments guys, and for you in particular ragsrule I can 100% relate to how you are feeling. My wife was exactly the same, she got herself so upset and in a panic at the thought of me having to go out to work if things went differently because there would be no chance my wife could have done so. I we were forced into a corner like that, I would have had no alternative but to request social care for my wife whilst I worked and we appealed - she wasn't agreeable to that either simply because of the discomfort and embarrassment factor, but we can't live off nothing and I was preparing myself to return to agency work or anything which could have gave us some form of income - this is how the government are affecting people, they are ripping people apart and claiming that the taxpayer is having to pay for all us "scroungers" and "fakers" although the genuine one's amongst us are suffering badly and having to suffer through no fault of our own. My advice to you ragsrule is this; first of all you don't need to wait for the appeal forms, simply write a letter back to the address which is on the letter stating you have been placed in the "work related group" stating how your illnesses affect you and in particular the difficulties you face on a day to day basis - or better still, if you feel you cannot do yourself justice on paper, ask your local social work department to contact the welfare rights groups to help you with the appeal letter. Sometimes writing a letter can be better than trying to fill in the forms because I still maintain the forms are scored on points and if certain boxes aren't ticked or certain boxes don't have writing in them then you'll not be successful with an appeal, despite having valid grounds to do so. The welfare rights groups within most Social Work departments can be extremely useful in supporting you whilst appealing and can offer a lot of advice too - and at the end of the day, don't forget that I believe no matter how unwell or disabled someone is, I think they are chancing their arm with everyone in the hope people don't fight the decisions and do try to find work when it's clear they should not be doing so as they pose a risk to themselves and potentially everyone around them depending on the type of job they may find themselves doing!. Above all, don't panic like my wife did, there is light at the end of the tunnel - stay calm, get in touch with the welfare rights people at your local social work department and ask them for help in writing a letter of appeal, and like us, you may find there is totally no need to worry about the potential for a whole tribunal although from my understanding of the entire process, it would appear most cases which make it to the tribunal process are being made in the favour of the claimant because most genuine people don't take the chance of going the distance. For me, this would appear to be a "cleansing" process by the government to clear away all the fakers, but they have went entirely the wrong way about it as all us genuine folk have been swept up in the same stroke ! Above all, good luck and do post back to keep us informed on how you get on, hopefully others reading this will be encouraged to continue fighting for the correct decision to be made eventually. Oh, and like my wife, if you cannot make it to the work focused interview, telephone them and let them know, depending on who you get they may even conduct the interview over the phone with you like they did with my wife

Well, thankfully my wife received a letter this morning explaining they have now reviewed the decision and placed her in the support group which, on one hand is a complete and utter relief to us both but on the other just proves the initial decisions being made regarding these applications are not based on the forms or medical evidence available to them. If those decisions were informed and considered one's, my wife would have been placed in the support group from the beginning and she wouldn't have had to ensure the additional stress and strain over the past month or so. Regardless, I'm happy this has now been sorted and would just like to reiterate to everyone facing similar problems with this "system" not to accept what they say if you have a genuine illness or disability as I firmly believe initial applications are rejected pending an appeal, and only then will they look at the application in more detail. Thanks to everyone who took the time to reply back too, most appreciated Thanks Marko

Thanks for the reply aw248 - it's great if people are able to attend the JC interviews but unfortunately my wife isn't - she has chronic pain from the different illnesses she has and finds it extremely difficult to interact with people she doesn't know, particularly in public and busy places. She has been through all the consultations in the past and tried all the various "therapies" too and because nothing seemed to hit the mark for her she has basically been abandoned as far as I'm concerned, so much so that we have even fought with our local pain management clinic to have her re-enlisted back onto their books in the hope of new or alternative therapies becoming available after she was mistakenly removed from their systems after they moved premises, we even had to take this to her Dr for a second referral which was over 2 years ago now, and we've still heard nothing - basically, there is little more they can do for my wife, because of the nature of the illnesses and so she's resigned herself to the fact she will live a life of chronic pain which has messed with her head significantly - I can't profess to know the medical in's and out's regarding this stuff, but I can see first hand how it affects her .. some days are obviously better than others but when faced with a life of chronic pain, the last thing you want to do is to be faced with pointless interviews by someone who doesn't even have a first aid certificate, let alone any significant medical background. If the government actually concentrated more on providing more funds to research and develop treatments for things like Fibromyalgia then maybe people would, once again, be able to be productive members of society and live a decent quality of life when struck down with such illnesses where little is still known or understood about them, but instead they spend hundreds of millions of pounds on private companies like ATOS who simply bully their way through application forms and medicals and all the while the taxpayer swallows all the bull**** about those on disability benefits being scroungers and cheats because the spin-doctors have successfully splattered their way through the media, which then allows the government to continue and justify their treatment of the genuinely ill and disabled ... I paid into the system all my life too, and when I hear ignorant and unsympathetic "taxpayers" bang on about how all the "scroungers" should be knocked off or how we are all "better off" than them, I just hope those taxpayers remember, firstly, most genuine people are most certainly not better off - I walked away from a £25k per year job to look after my wife and we wouldn't get half that on the benefits we get at the moment and secondly, just hope those taxpayers don't have to rely on the system we have at the moment because it would appear that it is entirely a random shot in the dark as to whether you succeed or not in your application, I believe eventually my wife's appeal will come through in her favour given the nature of her illnesses and the medical backing she has, but the strain and worry caused to both of us in the meantime sets us all back no end, emotionally and otherwise which add's more pressure to us, and to the health system - end result, more outlay for the NHS, massive bills from ATOS, more strain on the Dr's surgeries, and ultimately, it's the same taxpayer who will foot the bill for all these "improvements" to the system ... and all the while, appeals are on the increase, the vast majority of them are being made in favour of the person(s) claiming benefits, and so the additional extra outlay and strain is simply for nothing in the end!. http://mylegal.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=frontline&action=display&thread=805

Just an update on the situation ... my wife received a letter on Friday asking her to attend an interview at the local Job Centre which sent her into an absolute tizz !. Her Dr wrote a letter to ATOS explaining she was unsuitable to attend a previous medical because of her disabilities and social interaction problems, yet here we have the DWP asking her to attend an interview to discuss the "help" and "support" available to her in the hope of helping her back to work. I phoned to try and explain the situation and was put through to a main call centre, sent around the houses and then heard the phone being transferred then eventually hung up. I tried again and was transferred to our local job centre where the phone simply rang out. Another attempt and I eventually got through and was told the person who my wife was to see wasn't available. I left a message asking for her to return my call so I could explain how impractical it was to request my wife attend an "interview" which could last upto 1 hour given her chronic pain and constant discomfort. The following day at around 4pm I phoned again because we hadn't heard from anyone and was told this time the advisor in question had left for the day. My wife's appointment was 10am this morning so I phoned at 8am and was greeted by a message telling me the DWP was "now closed" and their opening hours for the contact centre didn't include Wednesdays !!. Not having a direct number for our local JC, I realised I would have to go up myself as the person involved in my wife's case hadn't returned my calls. The JC didn't open till 10am so I waited and finally explained the situation to the receptionist who kindly agreed to pass on the message. I had only just returned home when the phone rang and it was the woman involved in the interview asking to speak to my wife, passing the phone over it was clear this woman had neither been given the message I had just left 20 minutes previously or any of the other messages I had left via the phone. She then set about trying to speak to my wife via the phone, which was a struggle as she does become somewhat confused and quite anxious when trying to talk to someone she doesn't know on the phone but she struggled through and the woman from the DWP seemed quite understanding and sympathetic to my wife's problems. She also confirmed during her chat with my wife that someone had just informed her of my visit earlier. She asked my wife for a note of all her illnesses which I had to help her with and finally acknowledged the obvious difficulties my wife would have with seeking employment but explained she would likely have to check back some time in August to make sure there were no changes in her circumstances (remember, my wife has degenerative illnesses, in other words the illnesses only become worse, they do not improve!). We still don't really know for sure what the outcome of the chat was as my wife as she was too keen to end the call and wouldn't have thought to ask what happens next, or if any particular decisions could be made based on the chat/interview but the appeal is still in, that's pending, so I guess for now it's just a matter of waiting to see what happens next. I don't expect anything, I've learned not to anticipate anything either cause it rarely works out as you would expect - I'll keep the thread updated as and when something happens though Cheers for now all marko

Yep, just tried adding it again, but it would appear I'm not able to post URL's or at least not to that site anyway.

Ahh, thanks Nystagmite, seems like our post's crossed in the night ... I think both pages say the same thing anyways

Guys, thanks for all the replies, and yes, my wife fits a number of the criteria for being placed in the Support Group - some are on a constant basis whilst other criteria would be on a day to day basis. For example, her mood and ability to communicate successfully can fluctuate from one day to the next, one day she can be reasonably OK (yet, for me, knowing my wife better that most I'd say it's still a denigration of what it used to be and it's certainly not getting any better) but other days it's virtually impossible to recognise my wife; she becomes withdrawn, grey almost, and simply wants to retreat into her own little world, normally in bed or just wants to be left alone outright because the pain and discomfort is affecting her so badly. Physically, she is very much dependant on me to help her dress, get up and down from a seat, take a bath or simply use the toilet (most of those functions I have to encourage and coax her with anyway) as she would normally not be motivated enough to put herself through the extra discomfort and pain of moving and she has on more than one occasion left her toilet needs to the point where it's too late. As for the specifics of meeting the criteria, I found this link: http://www.disney.go.com/mickey//employment-and-support-allowance/esa-glossary/1353-support-group-descriptors with the following regarding meeting the criteria for the Support Group: (My wife would certainly meet many of these, although I find the "descriptors" somewhat unnerving, particularly the fact they call "reaching" putting something in a top pocket?! From what I remember from a previous DLA form and the ESA form, the questions are becoming more and more vague and more and more open to interpretation - for example, my wife could put something in a top pocket of a jacket but she couldn't put that jacket on herself, and unless she absolutely had to go out, she wouldn't normally anyway because she becomes anxious and stressed - does that then mean she can "reach" as far as they are concerned?!

Thanks Margaret, I have already sent a letter of appeal away and received an acknowledgement back stating they had received it (sorry, forgot to mention that in my first post). In the appeal letter I reiterated the chronic pain and discomfort my wife experiences on a daily basis which prevents her from performing even the simplest of tasks without fear of her injuring or harming herself, and the fact their decision was made in the absence of any physical examination and the vast majority of the details on the ESA form seemed to have been ignored. As far as I'm concerned, the decision was an administrative one, not a medical or informed one - personally, I'd like to hear from anyone who knows what kind of job can be done by someone who lives with chronic pain and discomfort on the level which requires a Class A drug for little relief and who physically has to lie down at various times during the day for anything from an hour to 3-4 hours and who has to have medication administered 3 times a day to avoid them taking an overdose and can't focus or remember the simplest of tasks?. Apparently, according to the government, my wife fit's the bill for something!. I'll keep you all updated as to the progress of the appeal, and possible tribunal, because we will be going the distance with this. Thanks again Mark

Hi guys, looking for a little feedback if possible and most appreciated in advance Basically, my wife has been claiming Incapacity Benefit and Income Support for around 3 years now, and since that time I have been her full time carer due to a catalogue of health problems, the main of which include Fibromyalgia, Osteopenia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and severe depression. She also suffers from Arthritis to make matters even worse. In short, for anyone who is unfamiliar with these illnesses, fibromyalgia is a degenerative muscular problem which causes chronic pain to my wife constantly to the point where she is sore and in pain 24/7 no matter what she does - she is prescribed a controlled drug called Matrifen which is an extremely strong pain killer - not only does this add to her condition of confusion but it also affects her balance, walking and general day to day life. Without the drug she is in too much pain, with it she has to sacrifice her ability to function normally. Osteopenia affects the bones and is basically the onset of Osteoporosis which, in short, is a thinning of the bone and means fractures are extremely easy, especially if the person falls or is prone to bumping into things. Chronic Fatigue is where you feel you have been on the go for days and days, yet you may have only just got out of bed or all of a sudden and without warning you have to lie down and close your eyes, although doing this doesn't necessarily mean you will rest sufficiently and gain any benefit from it, and in my wife's case it rarely helps her "recover" in any way, it's just that she has to lie down and close her eyes, normally she can still be aware of what's going on around her, it's just that she can't open her eyes or bring herself back into full conciousness any time soon. Finally, her severe depression is a result of all the health issue's she has had over the past 3-4 years and the stress and strain out relationship has had as a result - luckily, our relationship has survived and I've became to understand her health issues a lot better than I used to, but I digress, onto the matter at hand ... She received an ESA form to fill in, which I did on her behalf and completed it to the best of our ability. They then sent a letter requesting my wife attend a medical, to which I intimated would be a problem due to both my wife's physical and mental abilities, she becomes very self concious about her condition when in public and has taken severe panic attacks in the past when asked to attend medicals. A prior request for a DLA medical to be performed at home was granted, and her DLA claim was approved so I considered it a fair request to ask the same of ESA. They refused point blank and told us my wife would be required to request a letter from her Dr excusing her from attending such a medical. We did, and the Dr had no hesitation in providing such a letter. It was some 3 weeks later (just a few weeks ago) that my wife was sent a letter explaining she was successful in her claim for ESA and everything would be transferred over (i.e. from IB and IS to ESA). However, as I read further down the letter I noticed she had been placed in the "Work Related Activity Group" which basically means she has to attend a "back to work" interview, presumably on a regular basis too, which to my mind put's her more or less in the same boat as anyone wishing to claim JSA?. Apparently, some "health care" person will look at my wife's abilities and "needs" in the hope of returning her to work!. My wife cannot dress herself in the morning, I have to help her because of the level of discomfort and pain she experiences on a constant level - I have to be with her when she goes to and from the toilet because she has fell down the three stairs we have in our upper cottage flat (4 in a block) previously. She suffers mental blocks, and "fog" as it's known in the Fibromyalgia network which means she forgets things at the drop of a hat and cannot focus or concentrate for any length of time. She has been suicidal in the past and had attempted to end her life before I became her full time carer and I am now responsible for administering her medication. All of this was on the ESA form, and they have basically chosen to ignore all of those details and the request from her Dr that she is not able to attend a medical but would agree to one at home, and without so much as even physically seeing my wife, they have placed her into the Work-Related Activity Group. My first question I guess is, can they actually make a decision such as this based on the fact they haven't actually performed any medical?. If so, would I be correct to assume their case would be extremely weakened by the fact my wife does experience such problems on a constant basis and they have chosen to ignore those details?. Basically, in a nutshell, there is a better chance of hell freezing over rather than my wife being able to even attend a "back to work" interview, let alone be considered by a "health professional" for which work she may be suitable for. Any advice or opinions on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance Mark

I had the same problem a while ago and don't expect the banks to listen basically, particularly if you have a mixed income to your bank such as wages/benefits. From my limited exposure to matters like this, it would appear that they are NOT allowed to take money from benefits as this has been deemed the minimum amount of money you can live on by the welfare system although the confusion often comes in when you have more than 1 income to your bank account and they could simply turn round and argue this case if they wanted to, not that they would because they are more likely to simply tell you that the bank charges are part of your contract and will, without a doubt, shy away from any discussion regarding benefits, etc as was the case with me to the point where I was almost pulling the bank apart around them but at the end of the day it did no good and I simply added that charge onto the amount they already owe me. If possible, have 2 accounts, 1 for your benefits and another for anything else, this way you have a stronger argument against the banks if they apply charges to the account that your benefits are going into. Cheers Marko

gemspan, thanks for the reply - strangely enough I actually wondered about even posting my argument here as I've no doubt the banks lawyers are also scouring this and other similar sites to see what's happening and what angle's people are possibly going to come from next but decided to post it anyway. Thanks for the info and advice and will do as you suggest so it's just a matter now of getting myself finalised and submit the IA to the court. Will keep updating the thread as and when. Cheers Marko

Drafted a rough outline of how I intend to approach the court on lifting this sist, although please remember this is only a draft and would seriously appreciate anyone's opinions, comments and criticisms on the below before I submit it. Thanks in advance Incidental Application Case number (Pursuer) V (Defender) The Pursuer respectfully crave the Court to: Recall the sist for the above case number and grant the pursuer, Mr [fore,surname], to continue with the case. Additionally, he wishes to include further penalty charges levied by the defendant, Halifax plc on the accounts specified in the original action since the case was sisted, the details of which are as follows: Date - Details - Amount The decision on the OFT test case has now been made in part, to the effect that Unfair Terms of Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 do apply to the terms of bank accounts and to quote Mr Justice Andrew Smith … “a term falling within the scope of the Regulations is unfair if it causes a significant imbalance in the parties rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer in a manner or to an extent which is contrary to the requirement of good faith”. I further consider the banks charges a “significant imbalance” as they are grossly disproportionate to cost’s incurred by the banks and only serve to heighten their profits to the detriment of the consumer and at no stage in this or any other case have the banks shown good faith in disclosing the true cost’s of administration in such matters as returning direct debits or other unpaid or paid items. I respectfully request this court to invite the defendant to justify their cost’s incurred whilst administering penalty charges on my account and respectfully request this court uses their own discretion whilst doing so. It is understood and acknowledged that irrespective of the outcome of the OFT test case an appeal process will be launched which will take a considerable length of time to complete, therefore grossly extending the Pursuers right to the Scottish judicial process whilst being based on an English test case. Both the OFT and banks have had the opportunity, and still do, to raise an appropriate test case in Scotland although they have chosen not to, making their request to keep the sist in place in Scotland further unjustifiable. If this court decides it cannot lift the sist on this case, the Pursuer would request this court makes an order to Halifax plc to cease all future charges on his account(s) pending the final outcome of the OFT test case as it would seem a distinct imbalance to grant the defender the right to halt proceedings based on this test case yet deny the Pursuer grounds to halt the penalty charges levied by the defender, as ultimately both grounds would be based on the same test case and would not put the Pursuer at an advantage as any penalty charges which would normally be applied to the Pursuers account(s) could be recovered at a later date if that should so be the case. Signed: Pursuers: Dated:

I think I might be loosing it in my "not so" old age ... OK, I've just been reading up a little on the results of the test case and something sprang out at me that didn't before - the OFT test case is based PURELY on overdraft charges, right or wrong? I'm guessing I'm right cause I've just read a few news articles again - so if that's the case why would this include returned DD's etc, are they talking purely about unauthorised overdraft's or are they using this term so loosley that it incorporates all kinds of charges? I've only ever had charges for returned DD and if I've went overdrawn it's always been because the bank applied the charge to my account and took it into the red. If, indeed it is the case that the test case if based purely on unauthorised overdraft's then I think I've got an even stronger argument to get the sist recalled!. Any feedback appreciated. Marko

OK, swung by the court and did ask about recalling a sist and she explained I'd have to raise an "incidental application". In my haste I completely forgot about asking about ammending a claim although reading through the details on other websites regarding these applications it would appear I can alter my claim as that is partly what this form would be for. Basically, it's just a word doc as follows: Incidental Application Case number (Pursuer) V (Defender) The Pursuer/Defender respectfully crave the Court to: Signed: Pursuers: Dated: So it's down to business me thinks - not having the paperwork to hand I think I've been hit with a further 3-4 charges since submitting my claim last year and with the interest on the original charges having accrued I should be looking at a fair whack!. I'll keep this post alive and let everyone see my application before submitting it for comments and critisisms! Cheers Marko

In light of the recent "victory" (and I use the term loosley!) I am about to set off to my local sheriff court and request details on how I would go about recalling the sist on the grounds that the sheriff who dealt with my case stated she would be prepared to look at the case again when a decision was reached with the OFT test case. As far as I am concerned a decision has now been reached and in our favour, despite the appeal process no doubt being sought from the banks. If anyone has any words of encouragement or grounds for recalling the sist I'd be glad to hear them. I will also be asking the clerk if it is possible to ammend my original claim as I have since incurred further charges and I am currently unemployed (lost my job to redundancy in Feb). Again, any points or facts really appreciated. Kind Regards, Marko

Gemspan, I used some of the arguments from the Govan Law Centre when the sheriff was sisting my case but it made no difference - I think most of them are frightened of actually having a case heard and having to deal with it so just prefer to sist, makes their job easier to have the decisions made for them from the OFT test case I reckon!. I am going to wait for the outcome to the test case, but I have a sneeky feeling that the powers that be may very well step in at some point and add pressure from some angle as for the banks to have to pay out at this scale now will no doubt affect the government's purse - wouldn't be surprised if the OFT are somehow "convinced" of a compromise

gemspan, I would also like to contratulate you also on your strength in court - it's often the case (as in mine) that despite being prepared the defence can sometimes swing you off course with their "ma lords" "ma ladys" and "ma ole man's a dustman" routine!. I for one would be personally interested to hear anything you can suggest for challenging a court to hear a case after being sisted although despite trawling the internet for the past month or so I have been unable to get any clarification on how sist's work, how long they can be held up for, etc. I wish you luck and please do keep us informed marko

Guys, once again email alerts seem not to be working for me so apologies for the absence on this thread and well done on your case texel. Unfortunately, we're very much down to a matter of each sheriff rules how they want and where you were fortunate enough to get a sheriff that allowed your case to go ahead, I wasn't and loads more were in the same position. The thing that's really sticking in my throat at the minute is the fact that they sisted my case in the first place based on an English test case but moreso that there seems to be a distinct lack of guidance regarding how long a sist can be in place for. My immediate thought is that this would, again, depend on both the sheriff and the case although given that the test case will most certainly be appealed by the loosing side we're looking at a final decision maybe into next year. This was the argument I made at the time of my sist but it made no difference, although surely there is some point of law that says a case cannot be sisted for over a year? Marko

I would guess the clerk that you spoke to is very ill advised to say the least and was simply shooting their mouth off, as for the government to rule on such would open up a whole can of worms and would contravene the entire judicial system outright, not to mention there are still courts granting hearings, it's just that many of them are preferring to wait until the ENGLISH test case has been heard so I'd take what the clerk says with a pinch of salt although if anyone is thinking of putting in a claim DO IT NOW before the ruling is made as it could very well be that limitations are put in place as part of the ruling which could seriously impact the amount you might get back (but that's only my 2pence-worth!). My problem is that I have already had my day in court and despite having argued that the test case is ENGLISH and that other courts have denied sisting other cases and that (at the time) there was no immediate outcome on the horizon, the sheriff still allowed the sist to be put in place. I thought it was wrong at the time and still think it is wrong now. Basically, I'm looking to see if anyone can throw alternative legal basis on my challeging the court to hear the case now. Cheers Marko

OK, I've decided that I'm going to go for it and request that the court lift's the stay on my case on the grounds that although there may be a final decision in the pipeline this decision will be appealed by the loosing party which will further delay the matter therefore realistically there is no imminent decision and won't be for potentially 12 months. If anyone has any advice and/or can think of any test cases/examples that I can inlcude with my request I would be most grateful. Cheers Mark

Reading with interest some of the comments made by Brian Doctor QC (for the OFT) in the eighth day of the OFT test case, here yet again we have a statement that no matter how long this test case last's (currently expected to last until at least next week now) the loosing side will no doubt appeal which then brings the question how long are we expected to wait, or another way of putting it is how long are we obliged (by law) to wait and how long can a Sheriff sist a case pending this outcome?. My guess is there are no hard and fast rules but surely there must be some precedent out there?. Just in case anyone missed the latest news on this ... BBC NEWS | Business | OFT accuses banks over charges

Airdrie SC, can't remember exactly but it was (I think) September/October last year