Pip

[Klfhl]

PIP decision letter not arrived but award after all my stress and pain. Extremely happy but was just wondering if anyone has appealed decision letter and lost the benefit?

[rosewine]

I was content with what I received but do know some people have appealed and actually been downgraded. This can happen because a completely new person looks at your case and may interpret the rules slightly differently. Even if you are downgraded at Mandatory Reconsideration you can then ask to go to Tribunal but if the tribunal agrees with the second person unless there is a point of law they have incorrectly interpreted you are scuppered. Of course you can always reapply again by by that time the stress levels must be unbearable.x

[Hidden]

The only decision that can't be overturned (up or down) is if it comes from a Tribunal. Even then, the DWP can appeal to a higher tier Tribunal. However, if you can see obvious mistakes or important points that have been missed in the decision maker's letter, you could try challenging just those points you're unhappy with by requesting a Mandatory Reconsideration based upon your contesting only those specific points.

I'd suggest that your challenge should be phrased in terms of a polite thank you, alongside an equally polite questioning of whether the busy decision maker had overlooked specific areas of your evidence. Hopefully, that will focus the Mandatory Reconsideration decision maker's attention on reviewing just those points, rather than resulting in a complete reassessment of the entire decision.

It's risky. It depends upon how strong your case is. And, you have to ask whether the potential benefits of gaining some missing points are that important to you. Does it matter? That said, if you phrase things as a polite request along with a nice thank you, you're more likely to keep the decision maker on side. A polite 'request' rather than an aggressive 'challenge'.

If all else fails, there's always the Tribunal.

John

[releasethemagic]

When I went for the MR and then to Appeal, I began by saying why the points scores that I agreed with were correct and listed the medical and other evidence I had provided, the parts of the forms that covered it and the Assessor's comments. If they then wanted to over-turn any of those, they would have had to justify it very fully. I then went on to cover the scores I disagreed with, in the same way.

I went from no daily living at all, to Enhanced Rate for 4 years at Appeal. I kept my Enhanced Rate Mobility.

[Hidden in reply to releasethemagic]

Why mention things you're not contesting? Why reiterate evidence you submitted, if that evidence has already been accepted and you're happy with the decision? You don't need them to approve it twice.

DWP decision makers are busy people. (They're actually under strain of a tremendous workload.) You can take advantage of this by only asking them to look at the bits you're unhappy with. The less you ask them to look at, the happier they'll be, and the more likely you are to get the outcome you're after.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be cautious when dealing with the DWP, but by presenting the overworked desicion maker with medical evidence that you definitely don't want re-examined, you run the risk of them misunderstanding and thinking you want the good decisions reviewing.

Personally I'd only supply material I wanted them to reconsider. We all have the laziness gene, and people often don't read the whole letter, instead, they jump to what they think they're being asked to look at.

Pleased you won in the end 🍻,

John

[releasethemagic in reply to Hidden]

Enough people have lost points on review or appeal, that they have already been awarded for this to be a losing strategy. DWP make it quite clear that they look at everything again, not just what you contest so the best advice is to cover everything. The same goes at Tribunal. They look at all the points afresh.

[Hidden in reply to releasethemagic]

Yes, the DWP say that they look at everything again. But I know some decision makers and they are so overloaded with work and targets, they've only got time to look at what's absolutely essential to get your file off their desk.

Totally agree about the Tribunal looking at everything that's gone on. Although their only mandate is to look at the decisions for which you've brought the legal challenge. It's a court of law. You are asking them to overturn certain decisions, and those decisions are all they should be looking at.

That's not to say that Tribunal judges never take benefits away, but it is very rare and always where they believe the claimant is making false or overstated claims about their disabilities. And, very important, the Tribunal is required to give you advanced warning if their initial reading of the case (before you actually get to the hearing) suggests the outcome may be to your disadvantage. You can then withdraw your Tribunal appeal with no consequences.

See administrativeappeals.decis... if you're interested in reading what the higher tier Tribunals think about PIP Tribunals who, on their "own initiative", decide to broaden their remit by considering the removal of existing benefits rather than simply considering what they've been asked to look at. It shows you've got a strong case for having such rare occurrences overturned by appealing to the higher tier Tribunal. In this case, the senior judge said, "Tribunals need to be aware of the dangers of being both prosecutor and judge". Those are pretty strong words from one judge to another, especially as he overturned the previous judge's ruling!

John