PIP Mandatory Reconsideration. Do I make my own points suggestions or not?

[nukecad]

Of course you can "beat these people", around 65% of PIP and 70% of ESA appeals find in the claimants favor.

It just takes time, and the strength to keep plugging away at it.

It is a disgrace how long it takes, but that's mainly because the DWP keep getting things wrong so there are lots of appeals.
It's also costing the tribunal courts a fortune to correct the DWPs (sometimes deliberate) errors.

[scotleag]

Thank you. I suspect that figure is even higher if you subtract where the appellant doesn't turn up in person. Having undergone the process before with success - albeit with a different department and different circumstances - I don't have a problem with going through it again, though I'm not being over-confident. Around a third of appellants lose and presumably no one goes through the appeal process without thinking their case is strong. Also with HMRC it was one Judge to convince. With this I understand it's a panel of three which means presumably having to appeal successfully to two. I'm also told - whether true or not I have no idea - that the DWP are much more likely to send a representative along to argue their case. HMRC didn't show at my tribunal involving them. And it is obviously less difficult when there is no antagonist present. The other big difference is that whereas it as just me v HMRC, this is me v DWP backed up by ATOS. The great unknown of course is whether I'll be fit and well enough to attend appeal on the day. I'll have no idea until I wake up on the day itself.

I still hold out a slim hope of MR being successful. Since receiving the initial letter informing me of the end of DLA I've tried to find out as much about what happens in event of a rejected PIP application and from what I can see it looks like the reconsideration success rate has risen from around a fifth to almost a quarter. Perhaps the DWP are beginning to recognise they are losing money with knee-jerk responses, though that's exactly what appears to have happened with the initial decision. Still, we shall see. Thanks again for your advice.

[nukecad]

I had three on my ESA tribunal panel, the judge, a doctor, and a disability adviser.
Nobody from the DWP, although it was 8 years ago now.

It's still the judge who makes the decision, the others are there to advise the judge on medical and disability issues.

With my tribunal, their award letter (WRAG) was already typed up and on the table for me when I walked in.
They only wanted to talk to me because none of them had heard of my primary condition at the time, and they wanted to know more about it.

This indicates that it may have changed for ESA tribunals though so that there may only be a judge and a doctor:
https://equallives.org.uk/info-and-a...bunal-hearing/

There are usually three people on the panel for Disability Living Allowance and Personal Independence Payment appeals (Judge, Doctor, and a Disability Adviser) and two people for Employment and Support Allowance appeals (Judge and Doctor). Some appeals will just be before the Judge.

You do occasionally see those who think they have a good case for appeal who unfortunately have misunderstood the benefits system/laws, and are lodging appeals that have little or no chance of succeeding.
(I've seen one who insisted on appealing simply because her assessor was not a doctor, no other grounds. There is nothing in benefits law that says an assessor has to have any qualification at all so there was no chance of success).
It is always going to happen occasionally, especially when MH issues may be in play.

The DWP have recruited some 'Presenting Officers' to attend tribunals, so it is a bit more common for one to turn up nowadays.
From all accounts the POs are pretty useless, and if they say anything at all it's just to repeat what the DWP have already written in their submission.
I've seen stories of them being torn to pieces by judges asking why the DWP insist on being stupid.
I've even seen one where the DWP PO is reported to have told the tribunal that the DWP was wrong before things had even started. (You've got to be seriously pee'd off with your job to do something like that).

EDIT- Here's a tread from rightsnet about advisors experiences of DWP POs.
https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/12527/

[gus607]

You have absolutely nothing to lose by going the MR & appeal route. You can only gain. Go for it.

[scotleag]

That's my thinking exactly. As it was with the HMRC tribunal

[scotleag]

I'd imagine the Judge would be reluctant to overrule professionals so they need to be persuaded too. I wonder what's meant by a disability adviser? I can see how a GP fits in absolutely as the nature of their job means dealing with all sorts of problems and conditions but is the 'disability adviser' a similar sort of generalist? And where do they come from? Charities? Govt bodies? Something else?

[scotleag]

Ah, missed that edit. Thanks. If and when the MR is rejected then the next step before submission to tribunal will be to look at case law examples to see if there's anything similar to my circumstances that will be helpful

[nukecad]

I'd imagine the Judge would be reluctant to overrule professionals so they need to be persuaded too. I wonder what's meant by a disability adviser? I can see how a GP fits in absolutely as the nature of their job means dealing with all sorts of problems and conditions but is the 'disability adviser' a similar sort of generalist? And where do they come from? Charities? Govt bodies? Something else?

I believe that the 'Disability Advisers' were/are in fact Disability Benefits Advisers (often from a welfare organisation) who can inform the judge of current trends in how benefits are being awarded/refused by the DWP, and what tricks they are trying on.

(The Rightsnet discussion forum is a good place to keep up with current trends/tricks being seen by the independent advisors).

It's been a long time since benefit tribunal judges were fooled about the 'professionalism' of DWP and the assessors, they have seen plenty of examples of their incompetence.

[scotleag]

Thanks. I'll look up that forum you mentioned.

[nukecad]

PS. I wouldn't quote any case law yourself, judges don't like 'laymen' trying to be their own lawyers.