D.L.A. system, a total sham

[baconbuttyman]

my wife has a condition known as Cardio Myopathy, she has only 61% functionality of her heart.

She needs help with a lot of thing's, Mainly due to getting tired, when going round places like Alton Towers she needs a wheel chair so she can get around with out getting exhausted.

I drive for her so she can work and have some indipendance, i get up in the night when she needs a drink or the toilet (a history of light headedness leading to fainting).

heavy lifting is out, moving pans on the stove etc.

When she applied for full DLA they refused, that was 8 months ago, we appealed and we had the hearing today.

My point is all these people who have false claims get it straight away, wifey, who has a genuine claim is made to just through hoops and appeal etc.

Initially the wife was awarded the lower rate in 2007 for carpel tunnel syndrome, then in 2009 she was diagnosed cardio myopathy, hence placing a application for the higher award.

As she was turned down last May-ish, she appealed, so any developments to her condition since then were not allowed to be considered , stupid eh.

 

so this morning they asked about the Carpel tunnel, truthfully she answered that as she had an op in one hand and the other hand had settled down more or less, periodic pain etc, VERY little emphasis was placed on the heart condition, more on the carpel tunnel.

 

We said (which is all true) that wifey needs help in various aspects of her day to day living, from cooking to dressing, from working to going out.

I have to be with her and the days are planned so the least exhertion is placed on her.

 

we told the TRUTH.

 

The decision.... Refused and Revoked

 

We were shocked and we were offered NO explanation.

 

the panel had 3 "Experts", A doctor, Legal expert (his terms), a DLA expert.

 

When asked about day to day life by the DLA expert, she asked if wife was single would she be able to cook for herself etc, wifey answered the questions that she would amend her menu's to cope with being single to which there was an blank look off the DLA expert. I interjected, what relevance has being single got to do with it as she is not single and has a family to help her, the Legal expert said that that is the law. eh, what does that mean, lets move on he said.

 

Now i understand the role of the DLA expert, to debunk wifeys claim and to save the government money.

 

We now believe that we will be asked to pay the over payment back, my wife was under the impression that she was entitled to the lower rate, but this panel decided as of last may, she wasnt. Any advice would be welcomed

[Life-Goes-On]

Re The DLA "expert" When the question was asked about her able to cook for herself she should have answered "no". As doubtful she can cook a meal from scratch.

 

I don't think there is an overpayment, just the DLA will stop from today.

 

PS Sorry to hear that you didn't win the appeal.

Edited March 9, 2011 by Life-Goes-On
Added PS

[Nystagmite]

The criteria for the cooking test is "if you had all the ingredients, (ie, potatoes, some meat and vegetables) would you be able to cook a main meal for one?" They're not asking you if you can cook a meal for two people.

 

The appeal is based on what someone was like at the time the application was made. IE, if since putting in the application, someone is then diagnosed with another condition and as a result of this new condition, has more care and /or mobility needs, this is irrelevant.

[baconbuttyman]

tbh wifey felt the DLA expert was rail roading her answer, I feel the DLA expert interperetted her answers in a way to the benefit of the DLA, The hardly touched on the heart problems

[baconbuttyman]

The criteria for the cooking test is "if you had all the ingredients, (ie, potatoes, some meat and vegetables) would you be able to cook a main meal for one?" They're not asking you if you can cook a meal for two people.

 

The appeal is based on what someone was like at the time the application was made. IE, if since putting in the application, someone is then diagnosed with another condition and as a result of this new condition, has more care and /or mobility needs, this is irrelevant.

 

yes i understand that, after sitting back and going over it, the claim was for the HEART probs to be added to an existing claim, where the existing claim was found to be not needed any more (in their judgement) the the "add on" would not be given creedence and for the heart condition to be considered a new claim must be issued. Literally black and white.

 

The judgement was that the claim must be stopped as of May last year, so will be have to pay back the overpayment, even if Wifey believes the claim was valis initially

[Life-Goes-On]

Sadly but giving the answer she did, she shot herself in the foot. It was a truthful answer but not in the context of DLA question.

 

I know it makes no difference, but do you know if it was unanimous or majority?

[baconbuttyman]

Sadly but giving the answer she did, she shot herself in the foot. It was a truthful answer but not in the context of DLA question.

 

I know it makes no difference, but do you know if it was unanimous or majority?

 

no

[paulb1310]

Before a Tribunal can remove an award they must warn you and ensure that you are aware that they might remove the award that you have. They should offer you the chance to withdraw the appeal. If they did not do this it would probably be seen as an error in law giving you possible grounds to go further.

[baconbuttyman]

The judge (legal Expert) did say that the award may be revoked at the time of the hearing, but he did not give my wife the chance to withdraw the appeal at that time.

She was aware she could withdrw the appeal UPTO the date of the appeal, the appeal would have gone ahead in her absence if she didnt go to the appeal.

[paulb1310]

Hmm not as cut and dried as I thought. Okay get on to the Tribunals Service and request a statement of reasons and a record of proceedings. Then try to get some advice .. you would be looking for someone to help you find grounds (that means reasons) to review the Tribunal decision or appeal to the Upper Tribunal. It sounds worse than it is but the Upper Tribunal look for mistakes in law with the Tribunal and not just a dispute about the facts.

[baconbuttyman]

so getting the records would be the next step, the only reasons for the revokement was "in their opinion they decided that my wife did not need the award any more".

Should wifey have been given more indepth reasons for revokement.

Also wifey had to wait 10 months for the appeal due to a back log