Error of Law?

[EmmaPi]

Hello all,

 

Does anybody know if it is an "error of law" when during a tribunal a judge stops an accompanying person from speaking whilst they're trying to give relevant additional information (which could have led to more points)?

 

Any help is much appreciated!

[dpick]

Hi not sure as to law but I have represented two people at tribunals but with both I was on the appeal as their representative I did not just accompany they in the sense of just being with them. As far as a tribunal goes there is a big difference between the two positions.

 

dpick

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

I think dpick could be on the right track here. My OH came to the tribunal with me, but he wasn't allowed to speak.

 

I'll move this to the main benefits forum, because it's not just about Atos. More people should see it there.

 

My best, HB

[fedupandold]

The Tribunal are 'supposed' to take 'all' available evidence into account. However they simply cannot have every Tom, Dick & Harry giving their opinion. If that person is recognised by the DWP as acting with and on behalf of the claimant, then they can offer evidence.

I went to a Tribunal on behalf of my wife who at that time was hospitalised with PE and a collapsed lung. They refused to hear from me and instead carried out a 'paper' hearing. I was politely told that I had no right of audience as I was not a recognised person acting on her behalf. Bit miffed at that. She lost her appeal - Attendance Allowance.

Edited July 8, 2013 by fedupandold

[**Margaret**]

:EmmaPi:

 

'...... if it is an 'error of law' when ......' Possibly, if not allowing the chaperone to speak led to a breech of natural justice.

 

For tribunal panels the preferred evidence is oral evidence from the appellant, which is why (unless the appellant's too ill or disabled) it's so important to turn up! In tribunal terms there's a difference between a (named on the paperwork) representative speaking for the appellant and a friend or relative who's there for moral support. I've done the latter several times across different tribunal venues. I've never tried to speak for the appellant but, except for the time when I was a witness, towards the end I've usually been asked whether I want to add anything.

 

The first step for an appellant who believes there may be an error of law is to apply (in writing, within one month of the decision) for the judge's statement of reasons. May take upwards of three months to receive it. If, having read the statement, you think the disregarded evidence may have led to a different decision, I'd suggest you look for a welfare rights advisor or specialist benefits solicitor. For most of us taking an appeal to the upper tribunal isn't a do it yourself job.

 

Margaret.

Edited July 8, 2013 by **Margaret**

[fedupandold]

:EmmaPi:

 

'...... if it is an 'error of law' when ......' Possibly, if not allowing the chaperone to speak led to a breech of natural justice.

 

For tribunal panels the preferred evidence is oral evidence from the appellant, which is why (unless the appellant's too ill or disabled) it's so important to turn up! In tribunal terms there's a difference between a (named on the paperwork) representative speaking for the appellant and a friend or relative who's there for moral support. I've done the latter several times across different tribunal venues. I've never tried to speak for the appellant but, except for the time when I was a witness, towards the end I've usually been asked whether I want to add anything.

 

The first step for an appellant who believes there may be an error of law is to apply (in writing, within one month of the decision) for the judge's statement of reasons. May take upwards of three months to receive it. If, having read the statement, you think the disregarded evidence may have led to a different decision, I'd suggest you look for a welfare rights advisor or specialist benefits solicitor. For most of us taking an appeal to the upper tribunal isn't a do it yourself job.

 

Margaret.

 

I thought legal aid had been removed from advisors/solicitors in cases where there is a claim for a benefit involved?

It was seen as the taxpayer funding a solicitor to try and get more money out of the taxpayers.

 

I know our CAB has lost all of it's full time professional welfare rights workers, and I hear that a large legal advice clinic in Birmingham has just gone bankrupt.

 

Most Welfare Rights Officers are employed by the local authorities, but that their advice and support is now mainly limited to those claimants that have involvement with Social Services.

 

Mind you I have heard of ways round this - through the back door so to speak - but that is in my mind abusing the system for one's own selfish end.

[**Margaret**]

: ? ? ? ? ? ? :

 

Post April 13, legal aid remains available to eligible appellants who are pursuing welfare benefit appeals to the upper tribunal and higher courts. Section 12 of;

 

http://disabilityrightsuk.org/appealing-upper-tribunal-against-first-tier-tribunal-decision

 

Margaret.

[EmmaPi]

Hello and thank you so much to everyone for sharing your information, and so quickly as well. I cannot tell you how much this is appreciated! Thank you also, honeybee13, for moving the message to a more relevant section; I am new, so still feeling my way around here!

 

I understand from what has been written so far, that my words would only have mattered if I had been officially put forward as my OH's representative.

Sadly, I was only present as his partner, and I was not aware of this difference.

The trouble is that the person who was meant to be representing my OH, a member of a local advice group, had become ill himself due to stress (hardly surprising), and he was now replaced by someone who did not know my partner at all, and although there was so much left unsaid at the end, he did not add anything that helped towards obtaining the points the original person had said should be awarded.

 

There were a few other complications as well, one of which was the recent discovery of an unbelievable blunder in a therapist's letter, which was corrected, but not in the way it ought to have been, and this caused an extensive interrogation.

 

I suppose we have to wait for the Statement of Reasons, to see how the judge arrived at his verdict, and see if there is anything there that may be classed as an "error of law".

 

Out of interest, and also for the benefit of other people reading this, does anyone have a good explanation of what things could possibly be considered to be "errors of law"?

 

Again, many thanks for all your help, and best wishes to you all!

[EmmaPi]

Thank you for that link, Starryeyes52! There is a good explanation there regarding errors of law. I had not read it straight away as I thought it dealt primarily with legal aid, and I'd not got that far yet. Great info, thanks!

[**Margaret**]

:EmmaPi:

 

Best 'easy read' guide that I know of is section 8 of;

 

http://disabilityrightsuk.org/appealing-upper-tribunal-against-first-tier-tribunal-decision

 

Margaret.

 

Everyone types faster than Margaret.

Edited July 8, 2013 by **Margaret**

[EmmaPi]

Hello again, Starryeyes52/Margaret,

 

Very interesting:

It also includes failure to follow the procedural rules for all judicial process, for example bias or not allowing a party to speak.

And there is more that may very well be appropriate. Great work, Margaret, thanks again!!!

[**Margaret**]

:EmmaPi:

 

'...... my words would only have mattered if ......' Not necessarily. The judge's role is inquisitorial and comments from a carer/partner/friend who's with the appellant can help a panel's understanding of the appellant's disability.

 

'...... I was only present as his partner ......' You did your best in an already pear-shaped situation.

 

Wait for the statement of reasons, then get some professional help as to whether there's a case for setting aside the decision or further appeal.

 

Best wishes, Margaret.

[EmmaPi]

Hello Margaret,

 

Thank you so much for your encouragement! Thanks to your link to that fact sheet we have so far established four issues that would fit the description "error of law" if of course the Statement of Reasons proves that these issues contributed to the verdict.

My partner has already made an appointment with Citizens Advice for guidance on how to proceed further, but I will certainly keep checking these pages!

 

For now, thanks again, and very best wishes!!!

EmmaPi