I represented a client at a DLA appeal hearing yesterday. After the panel had asked their questions I was then asked by the Chair to question the client myself on their care needs. I was very surprised at this and thought at first that I had misunderstood what I had been asked to do but the Chair then repeated his request.

I have never been asked to do this at an appeal before, have other people had to do this? this seems like a very strange idea to me and I not sure what was gained from it.

I have done this at tribunals before, mainly in order to bring out additional information or to give the client a chance to expand on ares of their disability that the Tribunal hadn't covered very well - but have never been asked to do this by a Chair....

If you know Ms X's hand gives way when chopping vegetables and that she has cut herself so frequently that she no longer does so, and it doesn't crop up in the course of the appeal, then when asked at the end if you have anything to say, you can say: "Ms X's hand gives way when chopping vegetables and she has cut herself so frequently that she no longer does so". But that is your statement. If you ask Ms X how she chops vegetables she will hopefully answer in exactly the form you want. Of the two approaches the latter gives the best evidence (so long as the client doesn't say she has no problem!).

The chairman may have had such extensive experience of reps following path A and really wanted to hear path B to the extent that they told you to do it, who can tell?

Did you win?

It's not so much the question, but the way you phrase it - you obviously don't want to be seen to be leading the client but - the ones that spring to mind are the sort of distance one can walk without severe discomfort, and what happens after you have stopped to rest etc - I have noticed that Tribunals sometimes don't use the phrase severe discomfort, and they also often slip into asking questions in the present tense as opposed to as at the date of the decision....

Hi

Thanks for your responses it does make more sense now. I think I was just a bit surprised to be asked. We did win the appeal.

I wouldn't say this was a bad thing as it gives you the opportunity to illicit the information from the client - as previous contributors have mentioned.

I've had to do this a few times and at first I found it quite difficult. However, there are some things you might find helpful in the future:

1. Prepare yourself and the client;

2. Don't beat around the bush (you can lead the client - to a certain extent so don't overdo it). For example, "do you cut yourself when chopping veg?" is better than "tell us about chopping veg". Save the 'open' questions for issues relating to non-specific things where getting over a concept (the general difficulty in walking) might be better than a fact (details about falls);

3. Your general interview skills in advising are just as useful in this situation;

4. You only have a limited time, so prioritse the different needs in order of importance to the qualifying conditions for whichever benefit your dealing with.

Quite a few chairmen here prefer the rep not to make a detailed statement at the outset, so they have to invite comments and questions at the end.

And, of course, never ask questions that you don't already know the answers to. Preparation is 90% of casework. If your client blows it at the hearing then there is not much you can do about it. You will know that you have tried your best.

"...never ask a question you don't know the answer to..."

I once had a living together appeal in which (in response to my question) the alleged partner said he loved the claimant!

Thank you for that Mr X: it was the wrong answer and you have lost £13k!

Ouch!