Enfield Carers Centre run training sessions covering the approach you can take and where to get advocacy advice.
Any planned events are listed here.
Enfield Carers Centre run training sessions covering the approach you can take and where to get advocacy advice.
Any planned events are listed here.
A decision cannot be appealed unless the decision has first been reconsidered by a decision maker (unless it is a housing benefit decision). This process is called a Mandatory Reconsideration.
Getting support to challenge benefit decisions can be difficult because of limited services and high demands placed upon these. This is the reason why it is highly beneficial to be both informed and proactive in the best way to appeal benefits decisions. This does not only improve the chances of a successful challenge it would also give a support worker a head start, should you manage to access one, when they are working on your appeal; luckily there are resources online that can help you to understand benefit entitlements and regulations. Key links are provided at the end of this page.
One of the key points to remember is that an appeal is actually more to do with ensuring that benefit rules were followed correctly, and the claim was processed fairly, rather than just the belief that a decision is wrong. If a decision seems highly unfair but was correctly made in law then there is actually no grounds to appeal. This is why it is important that you understand the statutory rules of the benefit so that you can highlight why a decision was incorrectly made rather than just stating that the decision is disputed without giving clear reasons.
Benefit appeals are based on the date of decision, if you could walk for miles on the day of assessment but the next day fell over and broke your legs then your situation may have drastically changed but this would have little bearing when challenging a decision that you were not able to walk long distances, when assessed.
Let’s use the example of boxing to highlight these points. If you lost a bout and wanted to challenge the decision then you would explain your reasons why you believe you was treated unfairly. Perhaps your opponent was kicking you, they were much bigger and heavier than you or the judges of the match were biased towards them; all these reasons would mean that the processes followed were not fair and so the final decision is questionable. You may find, as you research, more technical reasons why the decision was suspect; perhaps their boxing gloves were the wrong thickness or they hadn’t weighed in properly, again by not following the rules the validity of the decision is questionable.
However, arguing that the decision was wrong because they kept hitting you and wouldn’t let you hit them back, as unfair as this may seem, is not against the rules so would not result in any change in the outcome. Also if they cheated in their next bout, but hadn’t during yours this is not a valid reason to object to the decision; as only the circumstances at the time the decision was made would be taken into account.
It would be foolhardy to undertake a boxing match without preparation and the same is true of benefit appeals.
These points may appear obvious but it is not uncommon for people appealing a PIP decision, for example, to keep saying that they are ill and to only provide evidence of their diagnosis when challenging a decision. Whereas PIP is a scoring based benefit that focuses on how a person can manage in a number of key activities, regardless of any condition or diagnosis that they may have. As their diagnosis is not actually being disputed but how their condition limits them within key activities, focusing on proving a diagnosis gains little and may overshadow other valid points that could be made.
If there is any decline in health, which happened after the original decision was made, this would be considered a change in circumstances rather than a grounds for appeal.
Arguing that a person needs more money, that a decision is felt to be unfair without providing any specific reasoning or that someone in a comparable situation gets the benefit so it should be awarded in this case too adds nothing to an appeal attempt. Whereas, focusing on the rules of that benefit and providing evidence and arguments why these were not applied correctly is essential.
Personal Independence Payments