Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
Loss of sight in one eye
Client had complete and permanent loss of sight in one eye following removal of tumour. Claimed DLA. Refused.
Seeking low rate care (on cooking test) and low rate mobility.
Client claims depth of vision and judgement problems. Bumps into people and finds it hard to negotiate pavements etc.
Decision based on consultant report which confirms loss of sight in one eye. Normal sight in other.
Basically refused on grounds that use of one eye should mean no difficulty.
Anyone dealt with such appeals….sight in one eye only???
Hard to gauge the problem but client comes accross as very credible in expressing his problems.
Google search shows significant contrast. There are various support groups for such situations…...some claiming long term difficulties and others saying that, after a short term adjustment period, sight in one eye should give no problems or limitations.
Would be interested in folks experience/thoughts in this area.
[ Edited: 22 Oct 2010 at 12:13 am by CMILKCAB ]Does your client drive?
I would agree that a limited award would be appropriate- the depth of field thing is very real. From a personal perspective, my husband lost one eye when he was a child but he still experiences difficulties sometimes (bumping into things outside his visual field, people sitting on the ‘wrong’ side of him, having to be extra careful when reverse parking, etc) and I can well imagine that for someone who has had normal vision into adulthood adapting would take quite a time.
Thanks for replies folks. Client unable to drive at present. Hopes to get licence back. This would suggest that short term award may be most appropriate.
Worth checking if tumour was linked to pituitary gland condition. If so some of the problems could be related to after effects. Very difficult condition to get across without referring to support group info. Just had an IB appeal for that condition.
Just an update.
Appeal heard on 23/02/2011.
Award of LRC and LRM given for 2 year period.
Client gave great account of difficulties in unfamiliar places and bumping into folk and shop rails etc.
Also problems with cooking with spillage and misjudgement.
DWP submission was simply….one good eye hence no problem.
Internet and especially support forums tells you this is not the case ;)
Let’s not forget there is nothing in the regs stating that someone who drives is not entitled to DLA. I don’t think it’s helpful to give such an impression, really. The question of driving might well come up in an appeal (or then again it may not) be we should not assume that because someone drives their appeal is automatically going to be lost.
John Birks: if you were advising someone in the circumstances of this claimant would “Do you drive?” be your first question? And if so, how would you respond? I just worry a bit that there might be folk in Stockport not challenging DLA decisions when maybe they should. It would be a bit rum if people from Derbyshire’s High Peak were winning appeals at Stockport Town Hall while those from the town were letting their claims wither.
Connolly, Don’t worry, I wasn’t aware you were worried until this morning but please don’t worry any further.
Let’s not forget there is nothing in the regs stating that someone who drives is not entitled to DLA. .
shame the DWP DLA section and Fraud section don’t understand that….
Does anyone ever worry about all the disabled people that are driving on our roads. Ive had some clients that make me shudder when they say they drive :-/
Yes, me too! Thankfully, most of the ones I’ve had like that only drive locally, but none the less…
Before anyone gets upset at the thought of anyone abusing disabled drivers.
Statistically disabled drivers are no more likely to cause an accident than a non-disabled driver providing that they both meet the minimum requirements as required to operate a vehicle safely.
I, for instance, cannot look over my shoulder or turn my head as I used to to gain a good view of the road.
My dear old mother has been deaf from birth, and driven since her teens. I’m convinced her bad driving is more to do with a generation thing than her lack of hearing.
There is a problem, of course, in testing the evidence, if a person states that they cannot see a stationary banana on a worktop (for instance) but could see a school crossing warden on a typical day on a typical morning at 30mph.
The minimum standards required to operate a vehicle safely and the assessment of the functions of getting into and out of a car are the key issue in Stockport, the High Peak or otherwise.
[ Edited: 4 Mar 2011 at 02:50 pm by John Birks ]D’oh clicked quote instead of edit. I’ll get my glasses checked.
[ Edited: 4 Mar 2011 at 02:51 pm by John Birks ]One doctor I met said that if ever he met a patient who said they had dizzy spells or blackouts he then asked “Ah, so you don’t drive, then?” To which nine times out of ten the answer was, “Oh but I never have them when I’m in the car. And they aren’t sort of real blackouts.”