I've had a late applic for appeal (LTAHAW) refused. Client only came in after she'd received notice of prosecution and so 6 months out of time. We put together what we consider very good medical reasons for late appeal and tried to show client had good prospects of success. Chair refused on grounds that no reasonable prospects. We asked for reconsideration on seeming irrationality of this decision - ie both parties should be able to give evidence at an oral hearing. Brief letter back from TAS to our second request "The district chairman has refused to admit the appeal"
It's surely unfair that one person can make such a decision. Doesn't sound very compatible with HRA to me. What's the next step if any ?
Thanks - Sue

Can't see any unfairness in one person making the decision, that's what judges and single member tribunals do all the time. If it had gone in front of a tribunal, one person would have made the decision on the appeal. The absence of a hearing to determine the late appeal issue might not meet the requirements of Article 6, but since the decision can be challenged by judicial review, that probably meets the need for a right to a hearing.

If TAS refuse to admit a late appeal the only challenge is judicial review. I can't see how they can have concluded that a cohab appeal had no reasonable prospect, unless the claimant had made a clear statement admitting that she was part of a couple. Most of the cohab submissions I've seen from DWP have very little evidence, and certainly nothing that couldn't be explained away by the claimant's oral evidence.

Try threatening JR and they might reconsider.

The decision may be judicially reviewable as there has to be special circumstances OR reasonable prospects of success. So if the issue of special circumstances has not been adequately addressed then this may be an error of law.

Regards
Paul

This issue of not considering either/or seems to be a big issue with the Nottingham TAS Office. Their standard forms seem to stil be saying 'and' although there is no excuse for a chairman not knowing the law on this. After all the law was changed 2 years ago now.

Thanks everyone. I've sent it over for counsel's opinion.

I've never really understood the process of revision, and from my experience I'm probably not the only one, so the following suggestion might be rubbish. Could you submit a late request for an 'any grounds' revision? If the DM refuses to change the decision then you have the normal appeal rights against that decision. If the DM or SSAT find in your claimants' favour then the decision takes effect from the date the decision you are disputing took effect - I think! If as I suspect this is wrong then I've no doubt someone will post a message shortly telling me.