saw a client yesterday who proposed that DLA claims are routinely disallowed, leaving the claimant to chase to appeal.

he had asked for a written explanation of the disallowance and a copy of the EMP report.

he's received the former but not the latter so has to chase up... the reasons were a selection of stock cliches so he's none the wiser.

he wanted to know why the reasons weren't given with the disallowance decision.

i don't think they ever have been provided initially for DLA, but for other benefits, i wondered if younger welfare rights advisers know that once upon a time a copy of the adjudication officer's formal decision was given on the reverse page, citing the relevant legislation? eeh - luxury!

i'm often none the wiser after the reasons have been given in the appeal submission and wondered how often other reps come across explanations which actually relate to the case, rather than the stock 'cut and paste' selection.
**************

all this talk of surveillance of DLA claimants and their families makes it clear that the basis on which the benefit is awarded originally is very important, and reasons are not usually recorded (other than reason code form) when benefit is allowed.

does anyone think there's a problem with this?
*****************
client's disabled daughter will be 16 in September, and she's had a claim form to complete in her own right, and is being reminder to return it pronto?

will her claim signed before her birthday be valid?

jj


"Darkness was cheap and Scrooge liked it."
Charles Dickens

I think your client is right - up to a point. Up to a couple of years ago I always got disallowance reasons (when requested) in great detail, often 2 or three full A4 pages. I used to find this detail very useful because if the client had any merit at all in their claim then these reasons would nearly always give grounds for dispute.

Now the disallowance merely quotes the bald eligability criteria and states it has not been met.

A cynical view would be that they interpreted giving detailed reasons as providing ammunition for dispute and therefore a tactical mistake. But to take this approach means that they are seeking to maximise disallowances rather than taking an even handed approach. Whatever the reason for the change the outcome does seem like routinely disallowing all but overwhelming applications.

Rather rthan getting bogged down in tactics however my approach has not really altered to disputes and appeals. The medical evidence is crucial (and this is where most of the most annoying frustrations occur)and concentrating on the effects of the disability to show the need for help is the key.

As for whether a form signed by a 16 yr old before their birthday is valid, the common practice for DLA is to accept (even require - because they send them out early) forms in advance of entitlement date. The question is when the entitlement begins.

Sorry jj I've got nothing to say publishable about this in general, but in specific I assume you've read CDLA/4228/2003 the upshot of which would be in general that it's probably best to get the claim signed 3 months or less before the birthday.