Jump to content


BankFodder BankFodder

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Served on 16 Feb.   On reviewing the MCOL website today for an updated, I noticed that 1) Hermes has aknowledged the claim, but not yet filed a defence, and 2) that I there was a glitch / error on the form. Essentially, it looks like I had accidentally left the "I will send detailed particulars of claim" box ticke (I thought I had unticked it), with the result that the claim section has been truncated, and some extra text has automatcially been added - in red below):   "...Claimant seeks £XXX, plus I will provide the defendant with separate detailed particulars within 14 days after service of the claim form. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of..."   This is obviously not ideal. Is it better to try to amend the claim somehow, or to just submit a brief POC that a) clarifies that I am seeking £XXX plus costs (which was automatically truncated), and b) sets out my calculation of the £XXX?  
    • Hi   It amazes me how they pass the buck as they don't want to deal with a private homeowner but if the shoe was on the other foot they would be hammering down on you for breach of tenancy.   As this is council housing you need to make a Formal Complaint in writing to the Council Housing about this (as a social housing landlord they have a complaints process they have to follow). you need to exhaust their complaints process. Make sure and title your letter Formal Complaint.   From what you have posted this tree is not just a nuisance but also a Health & Safety risk:   1. The tree being overgrown is now a danger to the occupants/Guest/Visitors to your property   2. The tree has overgrown into the Council Housings Boundaries your property causing damage/endangerment to the occupants/guest/visitors.   3. As the roots of the tree are also overgrown into your property you have concerns that these may be causing/damaging to any underground pipework that may be within the boundray of the property.   4. So far the Councils actions have been to treat their Council Housing tenant as a third class citizen with a private homeowner aloud to cause endangerment/possible damage due to these overgrown trees which are encroaching on your council house property/bounderies.   You also require clarification why you were sent the Healthy Neighbourhood Information which states I have to pay £375 to make a complaint. (make sure and attach a copy of the response that states this cost)   You also require copies of the following:   1. Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Customer Service Standard (not the leaflet) 3. Health & Safety Policy (not the leaflet) 4. Public Liability Insurance Policy. (not the leaflet) 5. Clarification from you if their is any underground pipeworks running through the bounderies within the garden area (you should have full knowledge of this it being your property/plans) 6. Compensation Policy (not the leaaflet) 7. Equality & Diversity Policy (not the leaflet)   When you get the above policies sit with a pen/pencil/highlighter and take you time reading them and just think to yourself 'DID THEY DO THAT' if not mark it then leave it for a while then do the same again this way you can basically throw/write back stating the haven't followed x policy with which part of that policy and your reason. (you are building evidence to use against them using their own policies. I would also like to refer you to The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provision) Act 1976: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1976/57/part/I/crossheading/dangerous-trees-and-excavations     You need to remember yes it is the Council but the Council Housing is a separate entity and is a Registered Social Landlord (RSL)   Is the Council Housing classed as a registered Charity? (what is their registration number whether charity or RSL?)   Also have a wee look at this CAG link:     
    • @rocky_sharma   Fame at last!!   Dunno how much help it would be in your case, but I could try digging out the txt of my defence if you think it might be relevant to your defence. We might hafta do this via PM, then e-mail though if ya wanna go down that route.   Good luck with yours anyway mate.
    • The car finance firm, owned by Provident Financial, voluntarily handed the money to all 5,933 customers potentially affected by the breaches, which occurred between April 1, 2014 and October 4, 2017. It was also fined £2.77m by the Financial Conduct Authority for the way it behaved. The FCA said Moneybarn's actions meant more than 1,400 customers, many of whom were vulnerable, defaulted on their loans after entering into 'unsustainable short-term repayment plans'. This meant that they were punished with extra fees and charges, which many could not afford. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-8013573/Moneybarn-pays-30m-customers-failing-treat-fairly.html   dx  
  • Our picks


Esa tribunal adjournment

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 460 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

New forum member here.



I had my tribunal for an ESA claim yesterday. The judge and doctor present were very sympathetic and listened to all I had to say.



The DWP didn't send their rep to sit in and listen.


Due to a legal complication and in the words of the judge 'this being a very unusual case' he has adjourned the case and wants the DWP to give evidence pertaining to a couple of points that were bought up.



How long are DWP given to reply? How long will the wait be for the new court date? If DWP wasn't represented why are they allowed another opportunity to put forward their side of things? I don't really understand if they were happy not to represent themselves why they are given another shot at appearing.



Thanks in advance.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to my post yesterday I have just had a reply from the court explaining the adjournment.



I was placed in the work related activity group but I didnt appeal against that for over 12 months (obviously the appeal was still accepted) DWP is being asked to explain what work related activity I was given since being placed in WRAG and if I wasnt required to do any, why I wasnt expected to undertake any activity.



The DWP must clarify which activity I would not have been expected to undertake.



I attended a single interview for JSA and the respondant must show details of all activity undertaken and asked of me in respect of the JSA claim.



Does this sound good from my point of view? The DWP has 21 days to respond!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an update, and even though I dont seem to have had a reply,


The DWP were asked to lodge papers and further evidence this deadline ran out on the 20th November so they are now two days over. I have spoken to the clerk of the court and they said there is a small possibility that the papers are still within the courts system, but in all probability DWP have missed this date.


The clerk led me to believe that they now go back to the judge for further instruction and that I will receive either notice of the papers or the further instruction. Unfortuantly he said to ring back in a fortnights time to check to see how things are progressing.


What does this mean in terms of my case? This seems somewhat of a side show to actually having the tribunal overturn the decision made? Is this a 'tactic' from DWP to further delay the proceedings?


Please can someone reply if it is only, it will work out when it works out, the waiting and the time that this is all taking is having a mental and physically effect on my well being.


Thanks in advance.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know what you can expect but I Can offer a point of view.


So this could be looked at that if the DWP decided to not obligate you to do work related activity for reasons of lack of ability then it could be seen as evidence that you should be in the support group.


On the other hand it could be one of those cases where its some kind of error DWP side why you simply never got contacted.


The extra opportunity I expect would probably not have been given if there was already enough evidence to make a favourable decision, the judge cannot give you what you want simply on the basis the DWP decided not to provide evidence or show up. I have lost tribunal cases where the DWP were not represented.


I dont know how strong your case is so I cannot comment specifically on your case, but I do believe at least in some cases the DWP act in a manner where they just make things awkward for claimants on the basis that perhaps the claimant will give up or a tribunal will rule in their favour, this happened on my last DLA tribunal, where the judge was very angry with the DWP, as it was his opinion (which I agreed with) that the DWP were wasting everyone's time by not awarding me from the outset, especially as they were given at least two chances before the hearing date to back down without a hearing but kept refusing when they had no case.


The DWP's tactic even tho they lost the case paid off tho as I decided not to renew my DLA due to the hassle they caused me.


If you provide more info I can offer more of an opinion if i think you will win or not, it sounds like you appealing to be moved from WRAG to SG, but if I am right you havent explained the reason why you think you should be in the SG.

  • Haha 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the reply worried33.


So originally I was changed from the Support Group to WRAG in that you are correct, and that is what I am appealing against on the grounds that my health had not changed from the first interview to the second and thus one year to the next. I was healthwise in the same position so to change me is in direct contrast to the letters and evidence that I have placed before the court from healthcare and professionals agreeing that I had indeed not improved.


The two major mistakes DWP have made were in reference to the second interviewee was that they wrote in the notes at the time that I had never have or has never had suicidal intentions or thoughts which was noted at the first interview and was mentioned as 'has suicidal thoughts and intentions'. As I responded to the Judge during the tribunal the first interview took nearly two hours to get through and the second one I was in and out inside of twenty minutes, and talking to a stranger who is neither empathetic or sympathetic is very difficult when you are already anxious and distressed. My legal advisor bought this before the court, but I don't know if this in itself grounds for the decision to be changed. The second being that after being moved to the WRAG there should have been a follow up interview or they should have had me in to put me on somekind of WRA.


The decision made at the second interview led to the change of group and only the 365 days more of ESA. At the time of the decision I didn't understand the implications of being changed from one group to another. After the change of group I wasn't called in to speak to anyone regarding Work Related Activity, and the one time that I went in at my own motivation the helper behind the desk couldn't explain the change in a way that I could clearly grasp and how it was going to affect me moving forward.


Thirteen months after the decision to change groups and multiple phone calls to the DWP I was informed that there was indeed an appeal system and that I could lodge a mandatory reconsideration, which I did even though I was told that it should have been put in 28 days after the initial decision to change my group. The DWP accepted the lateness of my appeal but still turned the appeal down. I then went ahead and put in for a tribunal to look at my case.


The Judge adjourned the case asking for further response from the DWP to answer the questions, (i) DWP must explain to the Court what work related activity if any I was required to undertake since the change of groups and if not so required why was he not expected to undertake any activity, (ii) DWP had supplied a list of work related activities in my area explaining the difference between easier and harder tasks. DWP should clarify to the court whether there is any activity within this list that I was not expected to undertake and (iii) in the DWP submission I atttended interviews for JSA. In evidence I stated that I only attended one interview and my claim was refused. DWP should provide comprehensive details of all activities undertaken by me in respect of the claim for JSA.


In respect of the first question I stated that I hadn't been asked to take part in any WRA and wasn't contacted at all, and the only time I went in was at my behest.


In respect to the third question I applied for JSA around 2 months after ESA stopped, I went to the Job Centre to fill in the forms with a JC helper, and at that time stated that my wife was working 21 hours a week, because JSA is income based that meant that I was never going to be able to receive any JSA. So my claim was cancelled either on that day or two weeks later at another interview (I wasn't sure if it was one or two interviews but I did acknowledge that to the tribunal), the helper said there was no point in having me do any activities because I wasn't going to be in receipt of benefits because of the income.


I phoned the clerk of the court yesterday and the evidence from DWP should have been in by the 19th of November, and the clerk said that they hadn't had anything from them yet.


As I understand it now, the Judge will be asked for further instruction, the tribunal will be relisted, and I will get another date slightly quicker because it will be prioritised.


As far as how strong my case is, my legal representative seems to think that things are in my favour but obviously would not go as far as to say yes you are going to get the decision overturned.


In respect of what you wrote about DWP having chances to turn down your case and not, the Judge just could not get his head around the fact that DWP accepted my appeal so late in the day, in his words he said 'If they had turned it down on the grounds of it being late which they could quite rightly have done, we would not be here today, I just can't understand their reason to allow the appeal so late in the day.'


My legal rep also said to me well before the tribunal stage that it was highly unusual for DWP to take on such a late appeal when they had no need to go through any of this. Having spoken to them yesterday as well to fill them in that the papers have not so far been lodged, they also said that just because it was an error that I wasn't called in and that I just slipped through the cracks so to speak will not be reason enough to not have called me in for WRA. (Even if that was the truth of the matter), legal rep said that if I wasn't asked or expected to take part in WRA there was no reason to not leave me in the support group.


I don't take the DWP's actions personally I understand that they are probably snowed under with all the changes and that I am not the only one having to go through this.


Again thank you in advance for your comments, sorry it is such a long post, if there is anything that I have not made clear please say.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...