Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
Retrospective medical evidence R(IS) 8/93 for LCW/LCWRA
That’s a fair point Elliot, wasn’t quite what I had envisaged either, but had been in the back of my mind that something like that may crop up. I’m open to any suggestions and advice regarding this, so feel free to weigh in.
The Judge advised that limited to a fit note stating just a diagnosis and without a medical panel member, she felt she couldn’t make a decision for the period 2018 - 2020 as regards to LCWRA.
I suppose the point is that the Judge isn’t being asked to actually decide anything substantive about LCWRA - that was already done by the DWP. It’s just a function of setting the effective date which is determined by law.
We used to have cases crop up now and then when someone had waited 5-6 years for an ESA WCA to be conducted usually as a result of some admin error somewhere. When the issue got resolved, the relevant rates would be backdated to 13 weeks from the start of the award, which was the end of the assessment phase. The fact that their health may have changed substantially over the years didn’t matter - it was just the position at the date of the assessment which mattered. It is the same for UC.
That’s a fair point Elliot, wasn’t quite what I had envisaged either, but had been in the back of my mind that something like that may crop up. I’m open to any suggestions and advice regarding this, so feel free to weigh in.
The Judge advised that limited to a fit note stating just a diagnosis and without a medical panel member, she felt she couldn’t make a decision for the period 2018 - 2020 as regards to LCWRA.
I suppose the point is that the Judge isn’t being asked to actually decide anything substantive about LCWRA - that was already done by the DWP. It’s just a function of setting the effective date which is determined by law.
We used to have cases crop up now and then when someone had waited 5-6 years for an ESA WCA to be conducted usually as a result of some admin error somewhere. When the issue got resolved, the relevant rates would be backdated to 13 weeks from the start of the award, which was the end of the assessment phase. The fact that their health may have changed substantially over the years didn’t matter - it was just the position at the date of the assessment which mattered. It is the same for UC.
Funnily enough Elliot we did raise WCA’s long waiting periods and etc etc eventual decision. That said thanks for the umpteen time i.e. invaluable help as per always.
Your post crystalised our thinking and galvanised whatever…...... chatted to client and….....
Anyway, we have applied for another direction to amend the first direction https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/2685/article/6 i.e. see your points above.
Big thanks as per usual Elliot etc etc directions set aside.
Client’s appeal was heard last week, she won. LCWRA from 2018. Plus £500 compensation ruled on by ICE.
Colleague Sarah did wonders with the ICE bit. The actual ICE report was damning, they even tried to reason with the dept to lapse case.
Thanks all for all the help.
Another one of those cases where I wonder whether the time and money spent by the DWP and as a consequence the Tribunal Service and ICE really was worthwhile in the grand scheme? How do the people making these decisions make it stack up? How on earth can they justify this level of intransigence which goes against all financial sense?
Quite apart from ethics of the course of action taken along with the time and money of the agencies supporting the client and the clients own time and wellbeing!
Another one of those cases where I wonder whether the time and money spent by the DWP and as a consequence the Tribunal Service and ICE really was worthwhile in the grand scheme? How do the people making these decisions make it stack up? How on earth can they justify this level of intransigence which goes against all financial sense?
Quite apart from ethics of the course of action taken along with the time and money of the agencies supporting the client and the clients own time and wellbeing!
It’s actually far far far worse than the impression given from my posts. Sanitized for professional reasons. Client has MS.
For completeness - :
Sadly, its the same DWP region and job centre featured in this https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/128134/pdf/ and this https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/seriously-ill-mental-health-inpatients-told-to-attend-jobcentre-or-risk-losing-benefits
https://askcpag.org.uk/content/208289/uc-mental-health-reasonable-adjustments