Yes, it's hearsay; but the rules of evidence that apply in a court case do not apply in the inquisitorial jurisdiction of Tribunals. These days even hearsay is permissible as evidence in civil courts, anyway. Tribunal can accept any evidence they like, but will then accord it due weight, so it they think it's rubbish they will ignore it!
In my experience Tribunals do prefer to get the evidence direct from the appellant - they prefer the "best", ie direct, evidence. Unless you as a rep know the information from your own knowledge - eg, in this case, you had been at the house when the daughter came round and you saw what she does - it is better to let the client give his evidence. I really can't see any rason why a rep can't give evidence of something they are qualified to give. For example, actual observations of walking ability can be really useful in DLA cases.
There can be problems if it is not clear what the rep is doing - are they saying in effect "my client tells me that", in which case let the client tell the Tribunal if he can, or "I have seen with my own eyes that"? If the rep slips from acting as a rep to acting as a witness without making it quite clear which role he is in at any given time, this is not helpful to anyone, and thus it is best avoided in case this happens.
The one absolute no-no is a rep or witness acting as an interpreter, and you will definitely get smacked down for that.
|