Please does anybody have any views suggestions on the following scenario:

Client awarded HR mob & MR Care DLA for 3 years at Appeal Tribunal in 2001. Had been unfavourable EMP report at that time.

At 2004 renewal client again turned down in relation to any award based on a new EMP report.

Papers requested and established that the new EMP report, in the doctors opinion section, states:
-" can only walk indoors supported by husabnd" and " does not walk outside"

In relation to the 'Need for Attention' checklist all but 3 activities indicate that the client can only do them with someone's help.

When the decision was queried the Decision Maker stated that in the last page of his report the EMP indicated that the clients clinical signs do not support the extent of the difficulties ... and this has been relied upon not to award benefit.

Medical Services have confirmed to me that after the initial views of the client the examination form should be completed as per the EMP's own opinion.

I therefore sent in the Medical Services reply to TAS and after consultation with the client asked for a paper hearing. The tribunal decision arrived back that the appeal had not gone ahead and that they either wanted the client to attend or consider a Domicillary hearing if she could not come.

Anybody else come accross seemingly favourable EMP reports being rejected by Decision makers?

Appeal next week

I've never had a "favourable" EMP report!

Yes, i've come across cases where the DM's interprets supportive medical evidence as grounds for disallowance - they're a lot of fun!

has the EMP referred to pain syndrome or illness behaviour or some such term?

if so, you'll find in commissioner jacob's decision CDLA 902/04 why the DM's decision is irrational, and the explanation of why the tribunal want the opportunity to question your client. her evidence, particularly her own words, provide the key to enable the tribunal to bridge the gap between clinical findings and the client's level of disability.

i had a similar case, in which the client could not attend a hearing, and our request for a domiciliary hearing was refused. his wife and i attended, and the appeal was successful, but we were assisted with a quite superb report from his pain management consultant. even so, i sensed the tribunal were sceptical, even though this was an extreme case, until in the strange way these things sometimes happen, mrs. client dropped out a snippet of evidence, and the tribunal was enlightened.


jj

We have come across these before - both with GP and EMP reports - upon reading them several times, and then reading the DM interpretation of them, you can begin to see where they have cherry picked those parts that best match the decision they are trying to justify.

They might pick up on an isolated sentence, (or even the odd phrase) as justification, ignoring the fact that the report is on balance favourable to the client's case. Mind you, the fact that EMP's often contradict themselves doesn't help.........

Thank you for your replies.

I really do have concerns that the 'Independant' Appeals Service is essentially doing the Decision Makers job. Should it not be the case that the DM has to justify the initial decision made on the evidence available and if he/she cannot then they have failed to show sufficient grounds to change a decision at renewal?

By essentially asking the client to attend TAS are trying to obtain evidence on behalf of the Decision Maker that could justify the no award decision when none is available at present.

Bensup, I've got an appeal coming up with a very favourable EMP report, only trouble is the EMP report was then referred to medical branch who attempted to tear it to shreds 'unfocussed' 'accepts the claimants comments as medical facts' 'medically improbable' etc. etc.

Funnily enough i've had one this morning!! I can't believe it.

It's a chronic fatigue one, ordered by a Tribunal and i really cannot believe how supportive it is.

Just wait and see what the DBU do with it now!!

I presume that this EMP you're on about Jim will need to be retrained to the departments satisfaction?!

Good Luck anyway

Nicky

this one's about CFS too, and like yours it is excelent. I've got family from Walney island by the way. cheers ...jim

Ahh! Gods Golden Acre! Live there too and love it!

Interesting to note this and that I am not alone and that paranoia is not setting in . I not only had a favourable EMP report but also had a report from the "doctor" at the hospital for a client of mine who has severe problems with her spine and prolapsed discs pus aother medical problems. The DM did not accept any of these reports and went on to query it further from the medical advisor at the DBC, who of course in their infinite wisdom! said in their report "...on basis of probability client does not have said needs....."

At the appeal which the client could not attend as client was in hospital and insisted I continue with the appeal hearing in their absence, I have to say thankfully the tribunal could see the obvious and we won.

Client's perception and reasoning of why they feel decision was refused initially, I am not willing to discuss on a public forum but I'm thinking maybe I should keep track of things to see if this is just an isolated case or a common occurrence.

glad your appeal was successful...

what kind of medical advice is 'on the balance of probability etc...'?!!! maybe there's something in the water...

: )

jj