Have received full statment following Client's unsuccessful DLA appeal. Chair noted Client may have some balance problems but suggests instead of his walking stick Client uses a Zimmer frame with wheels. I thought the idea of using a Zimmer frame is that once the legs of the frame were on the ground the frame doesn't move. A frame on wheels, used outdoors is not much use if the user looses balance and the frame wheels itself ahead or am I missing something?

Also Client has spotted several of his answers to questions have been either misinterpreted or are just palin wrong. Anyone had success appeal to Comms when it is a case of Client's word against the Tribunal's? No rep at the hearing, Client came to us after appeal failed.

Zimmer frames with wheels (at least all the ones I have seen)only have wheels at the front. Therefore the disabled person does not have to lift the frame, just tilt it (with the wheels as pivot) and slide it forward. It should not slip forward unless lifted.

Whether they help people with balance problems particularly I wouldn't know, I always assumed they were for people with weakness in the arms as well as legs...

Victoria J

If the Tribunal did not ask the claimant at the hearing whether he felt a zimmer with wheels would be any use then there may well be an error of law for breach of natural justice in failing to put an alternative measure to claimant for comment.

Yes, the tribunal did put the zimmer with wheels question to the Client, so no error there. As it happens since my first post I have seen lots of people getting around using zimmer with wheels outdoors, totally different to what I imagined.