I represented a client at appeal in September.
He was taken very ill in october 04, total organ failure and in ICU. Discharged home 12/04, applied for DLA 01/05.
Decision made 4/3/05, nil award as not expected to satisfy requirements for six months forwards (i.e. until 07/05).
Specialist wrote a letter 31/3/05 saying "He is making sure but very slow progress... I would not expect a full recovery for at least a year".
Tribunal held 9/05, looked at how his recovery had progressed between 3/05 and day of hearing. They confirmed decision.
I argued that they should ignore anything that had happened after the date of decision. They didn't agree. In written statement Chair just says they could take i into account (cites no authority for this).
I think the chair's reasoning is wrong.
However, I've seen a commissioners decision which says that if the recovery from illness had begun at teh time of the decision (which in this case it had), then the recovery's progress is not a change of circumstances.
Is it worth arguing further?

Not sure if the following decision is useful.

In CDLA/2878/2000 Commissioner Angus held that tribunals must not exercise hindsight when making a decision. What matters is what was known at the time. In this case the issue concerned whether the claimant was likely to continue to satisfy the disability condition for six months.

thanks, I did have a look at Commissioner Angus' decision and I was hopeful! However, CDLA/1564/04 is very similar to the situtation my client was in. Evidnece before the DM did state that client's recuperation had already begun. Commissioner Fellner said that the improvement was not a fresh circumstance. This cancelled out my earlier hope and left me, if not despairing, a little downcast.
In this particular case, I am not happy with the way teh Cahir reasoned out the tribunal's decision but I think teh Commissioner would substitue a decision along teh lines of the above.
Oh the rollar coaster that is Welfare Rights advice!