ESA appeals tribunal - being represented boosts your chances of succeeding

[stalin's dead]

just found this report from yesterday - what is incredible is that being represented increases your chances of success by 2/1

 

'Employment Minister Chris Grayling’s press release yesterday provides an interesting spin on the stats. Hasn’t it always been the case that about a third of all claimants remain on incapacity benefits only for a short period because they have a short term illness (isn’t that why Sickness Benefit and SSP are known as ‘short term benefits and ESA is paid at assessment rate for 13 weeks?).

 

Is Grayling suggesting GPs have suddenly started to issue med certs to large numbers of claimants who are actually fit for work or has he discovered a way to stop people becoming sick in the first place?

 

TS stats for the four quarters of 2010 obtained under a freedom of information request show (subject to any error in our maths type disclaimer - NB the TS figs are rounded) show for ESA appeals in 2010:

 

disposed of at hearing 114,000 (of which 75,700 oral hearings)

upheld 56,400

allowed 43,100

rep attended 18,000 (of which 12,100 allowed)

 

NB: we are advised that from the 1st qtr of 11-12 outcome by representation etc will again be provided in the quarterly Tribunals Service data sets when published.

 

Therefore 38% of all ESA appeals in 2010 were allowed (67% where the claimant was represented [which assume includes where the rep indicated was family or friend rather than a WRO etc).

 

These stats broadly reflect those under the AWT/PCA, illustrate the value of competent representation and how badly the WCA is applied in practice.

 

Perhaps Chris Grayling’s statement should read:

 

“Once again we have clear evidence of the poor quality of the assessments provided by Atos Healthcare and the large number of incorrect decisions being made by my colleague the Secretary of State. We now know very clearly that the vast majority on new claimant for sickness benefits are genuinely sick and unable to work just like they always have been.”

 

“Thats why we are taking no action to change the Depts. multi-million pound contract with Atos Healthcare or improve the quality of decision making and so reduce the number of appeals. We will, of course, continue to bury our heads in the sand and pretend that there is nothing wrong with the application of the WCA. It can’t be right and proper to try to save tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers money on a process that is not fit for purpose. We might, however, consider chnaging the name of everthing again and hope that the issue will go away'

 

-

 

***Therefore 38% of all ESA appeals in 2010 were allowed (67% where the claimant was represented [which assume includes where the rep indicated was family or friend rather than a WRO etc)***

 

I find the above statistic quite incredible. 38% allowed when not represented, 67% when represented !!!

 

Speechless..why does it make such a difference? What are the reasons for such a disparity?

 

If only I knew this some time ago!!

 

It appears the message going forward is 'take someone with you who knows what they are doing or if not a family member or friend)

 

GLA

[leemack]

I think its not just the fact of of having the rep at the appeal, being there makes little difference. But the prep work that a good rep will do, and the arguments made in the submission can make all the difference. Also advising a client on how to answer questions - as that can make a big difference.

 

Also a lot of appellants with no rep and no knowledge of the system still think that they need to prove they have a condition - and not that they need to prove they fulfill the descriptors. Also they don't realise that in order to have your own evidence preferred by the tribunal, you need to cast doubt on the atos medical report and dwp submission, so that on a balance of probabilities the atos report and dwp submission is considered less reliable or unreliable.

 

Without knowledge of the system, a lot is dependant on the tribunal members digging through the information and inconsistencies and coming to the right conclusion. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.

[stalin's dead]

excellent reply. I think you've hit the nail on the head

 

that's precisely how I intend to approach my next appeal should i fail another wca

 

thanks