i'm inclining towards Gerry's view, but not at all sure i'm following this... does the evidence from 1994 support an award of middle rate care and an official error in the award of LMC? you say the OE doesn't relate to the care side. what you would have thrown back at you is that he applied for a supersession on grounds of worsening in condition, also he did not appeal the LCC at the time of award?
if you now argue it should have been MCC all along, and unless you have an exceptionally good relationship with your tribunals, i'd expect it to be very sceptical and be looking for grounds to turn it down, not least for making them consider a 10 year old award and that decision about revisions/supersessions! not that i'm suggesting it would allow any hard feelings to influence it, of course. you think the official error ground is dodgy anyway.
i take your point about he's got nothing to lose, even of it decided that the official error revision was wrong, but is there a risk of making the tribunal hostile to him qualifying for MCC now?
on the other hand, if it was one of those truly atrocious decisions, and the evidence supports the case, they seem to have given you the opportunity to re-open it. once the can is opened, the worms can crawl unrestricted. i don't know if i'll ever fathom the dreaded CD, but it does seem to give the tribunal the power to substitute its own decision where it considers the DWP have made a mess of it.
jj
|