I am currently fighting a DWP tribunal decision and went to my local CAB to get advice .
Background is, an application for PIP, went through mandatory recon and went to tribunal. When I finally got the statement of reasons it appears to me that
a) the panel did not consider some of the evidence as there was no mention of it , not even to say that it wasn't relevant although I think it is . These include but are not limited to, specialised glasses to read, various letters from my University disability resources stating my needs and challenges .
b) the Tribunal erred in law i.e there interpretations of the law did not follow the guidelines provided by the DWP or indeed the relevant legislation . Again a couple of examples are that the Judge stated that time is not a factor in doing a task , the example given was if it took me 20 minutes to get out of bed by myself because of arthritis this was irrelevant , the other one was the definition of a simple meal -this is a simple one course meal cooked from raw ingredients .
Anyway, moving on
CAB referred me to someone who they said was a solicitor and who would give me a free 30 minute consultation followed by, if appropriate a no win no fee arrangement . An appointment was made
The appointment has now been cancelled 3 times , luckily for me at the moment it is not time critical as I have written (with help) a letter to the DJ asking for a set aside for amongst other things the reasons above and if that is not appropriate for leave to appeal to the upper tribunal. I am still awaiting a response , Judges working faster than a speeding bullet as we all know.
Meanwhile I have found that this man is not a solicitor or barrister but does have a degree in law from the illustrious University of Derby . His main website is this
http://www.communitylegal.co.uk/
he does however also run this website
http://www.employmentspecialist.co.uk/default.html
Although in the very small print at the bottom he does say he is not a barrister I think there is a very clear intention to deceive.
I am not against anyone earning a living if they provide a good service but I feel that there has been deception. I am of course writing to the CAB office about his unreliability nut wonder if anyone has any other thoughts .
Background is, an application for PIP, went through mandatory recon and went to tribunal. When I finally got the statement of reasons it appears to me that
a) the panel did not consider some of the evidence as there was no mention of it , not even to say that it wasn't relevant although I think it is . These include but are not limited to, specialised glasses to read, various letters from my University disability resources stating my needs and challenges .
b) the Tribunal erred in law i.e there interpretations of the law did not follow the guidelines provided by the DWP or indeed the relevant legislation . Again a couple of examples are that the Judge stated that time is not a factor in doing a task , the example given was if it took me 20 minutes to get out of bed by myself because of arthritis this was irrelevant , the other one was the definition of a simple meal -this is a simple one course meal cooked from raw ingredients .
Anyway, moving on
CAB referred me to someone who they said was a solicitor and who would give me a free 30 minute consultation followed by, if appropriate a no win no fee arrangement . An appointment was made
The appointment has now been cancelled 3 times , luckily for me at the moment it is not time critical as I have written (with help) a letter to the DJ asking for a set aside for amongst other things the reasons above and if that is not appropriate for leave to appeal to the upper tribunal. I am still awaiting a response , Judges working faster than a speeding bullet as we all know.
Meanwhile I have found that this man is not a solicitor or barrister but does have a degree in law from the illustrious University of Derby . His main website is this
http://www.communitylegal.co.uk/
he does however also run this website
http://www.employmentspecialist.co.uk/default.html
Although in the very small print at the bottom he does say he is not a barrister I think there is a very clear intention to deceive.
I am not against anyone earning a living if they provide a good service but I feel that there has been deception. I am of course writing to the CAB office about his unreliability nut wonder if anyone has any other thoughts .
Comment