maybe we should do a worst decision ever competion - but would we ever get to the end of it?
i must say it's going it a bit to supersede? on error in law grounds. they usually wait til the renewal. is this a new trend or was it a life award? : )
don't you just love these "should" be able to... decisions?
i've got one on the go at the moment, appealing for highest award, was given low care. can't say too much at present but if the DWP's 'psychological overlay' trumps the brilliant and up to date with scientific thinking report from the consultant in pain management, i will explode in full technicolor.
another 'should be able to' decision, which the tribunal agreed should never have reached the tribunal, implied (though i've no reason to suspect the D-M thought her prejudices through) that the disabled person had no need to do anything all day other than sit in her chair and vegetate. simple! no help needed!
the D-M's job is to decide objectively on the evidence whether the conditions are met for any award of DLA. it seems to me the D-M's 'think' their job is to find reasons to disallow. the number of overturned appeals is evidence that something is very wrong, and if the DWP is interested, I think they need look only a little further than the rubbish in the little decision box that the 'automated' appeal submissions refer us to. considering the huge body of case work on DLA, why have i never seen any considered in the 'little box' recording the DM's decision? Why is the claimant's evidence ignored, unless it can be used to disallow?
In the appeal submissions, the reference to case law appears only in the 'automatically' produced list. Considering the efforts put in to Commissioners' decision, i wonder they don't go round with their heads in their hands wondering why they bother! The appeal writers (round here at least) do not engage with the appeal in any way. The reasons for the decision is given by rote - " It has been established that the conditions... are not satisfied." AAARRGGHHH! how do they get away with this? they don't make submissions on the relevant issues in thee appeal. they don't even IDENTIFY the relevant issues. the whole thing is left to the tribunal, which i assume is resourced to hear challenges to first tier decisions, but not to do the job the first tier decision-makers couldn't be bothered to do properly in the first place. they must get sick of cases going to appeal which should never have to get there.
oh, and what about the meaningless 'reconsideration' page? hahaha!
so, why does the approach of DLA D-M's appear to be that of finding 'reasons' to disallow? Parliament has seen fit to enact legislation paying sums of money to disabled people who meet certain criteria. the civil service could not allow its executive agencies to save the treasury money by giving unjust decisions contrary to the will of parliament, could it?
past caring, on a HB fraud thread made the point that the DWP flies disallowance decisions without evidence, and given that only a smallish percentage appeal, the DWP wins. spot on.
jj
|