Jump to content

DLA some movement


Llwyncelyn
 Share

Recommended Posts

[quote user="Tony F Dordogne"]

Maybe Gay but that doesn't detract from the fact that the child is supposed to be in school here in France, [/quote]

Easy to make a mistake from what I've quoted above & also, after 10 posts, would Guile have cottoned on to RH's name?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 610
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Oh dear, a missing comma causes so much confusion and causes a new poster to think I may have insulted him - you want insults I can do them but they are against the rules here!

And whatever Guile says, it still doesn't add up, I have a copy of the DWP decision maker's guidelines and the girl's case would still mean she is excluded from benefit with the information that Guile has provided and as he/she is unable or unwilling to give any further information, it looks as tho we can only make our own assumptions.  And the mother dying of cancer has no bearing on this at all, sad tho that may be.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just once would add that I have read the judgments Decision Makers Guides plus everything else that legal wise I had to read on DLA. There is something quite amiss here and certainly if we are to take what we are told on face value then either the DWP have changed their approach or as I say something else has been introducted to the subject area.

The guidelines are clear and it matters not if they spend more time in the UK (that is a six hour law lecture) the rules are strict 26/52.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Guile I had sent you an email and in what I think was a forlorn attempt to give you some background information and equally to put you as they say 'right' It was bounced by your ISP. It would not be my intention to post my response on an open basis and thus to expose you once more to ridicule.

Here I quote ' Lets hope they are as expert as they think they are.'

Guile you know nothing as to the background of let us say the steering group know nothing whatsoever of the legal background and qualifications of certain individuals and indeed you know nothing whatsoever.

If you did it and it is not my intention to give you any further oxygen in this regard then you would simply just walk away.

Your last sentence is beyond contempt.

This is a very serious issue and your input has added nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
My wife has recently learnt that her appeal will be heard before an Independant Tribunal.

Because she appealed against the decision to terminate her dla back in 2003 and of course lost, the DWP say that they cannot overturn the decision of a higher authority. So hopefully the Independant Tribunal will be able to overturn the decision.

I'd be most interested to know of anyone else on this forum who is in a similar position so that we can share and pool our experiences.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there's even more good news.  The DWP has decided NOT to appeal against the judgement of Justice Mesher in one of the more widely publicised cases (in the French/British press) and clearly they have accepted in that case and (by default) the arguments in the German case on the past presence (26/52 week) rule that they should - and have - paid all the back payments and re-instated the benefit at least for the claimant in France.  His carers are now pursuing the mobility element of his claim, which Mesher has already sent back to the ECJ for a revised decision on its eligibility as a sickness benefit.

So it looks as tho they are accepting that their past presence rule argument has fallen tho it remains to be seen whether or not they continue to apply the argument to other people seeking reinstatement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one came in today from the Campaign to protect the benefits of people who should be claiming them:

"In what may represent a dramatic victory for campaigners, Care Services Minister Phil Hope yesterday told a reporter at the Labour Party conference that DLA is not under threat by the care green paper.

According to the Disability Now website, Phil Hope, when asked if he would abolish DLA after the election, replied:

“No. All the models that we have done have not included DLA. But if people were to make a case to integrate DLA into a comprehensive system, then I'm very happy to hear that case and have those arguments.

"DLA is not under threat and people can be very happy"."

As many of the people at the DWP don't understand what abiding by the law means and cannot even understand their own rules and regulations, including the Ministers, let's just take this at face value for the moment but be aware that it may end up on the agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just to bump this thread again .......

The latest news is that the fight still goes on.  The DWP has three test cases pending at the moment and as a consequence they have asked the Chairman of Tribunals to hold in abeyance all the 500 other cases that have been registered for a Tribunal hearing/appeal.

The UK Government is the subject of proceedings by the EU for failing to implement the ECJ's 2007 decision and have already found one of the reasons for refusal to be unlawful.

And, amongst the members of the Campaign, we have been told today that one of the active members has only a few days left to him and that he will die without his case having been resolved.  All that has done is reinforce the determination of those being denied benefit by the UK Government to take their cases to a proper conclusion.

As a long-term and hard line Labour supporter, I'm more angry than I have been for a long time with Brown and all his acolytes who should hang their heads in shame because now their policy of letting people die off to reduce the claims is starting to have effect.

But they're wrong, all they've done is to really piss off the campaigners even more and make us even more determined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

New information to bump the thread.

The final date for the UK to make their case on the EU's infringement proceedings is tomorrow and from what we can gather, no reponse as yet.

The CPAG and ACE have taken the test cases and the DWP have agreed to use them, they will go to the Tribunal in January (we hope).  In the meantime and without any consultation with the claimants, the DWP have applied to have the other 340 + cases held in abeyance until the outcome is known.  But, the test cases may not even be heard if the UK looses the Infringement case because one of their main arguments will automatically fall and the other be totally undermined.

MP, Lords, MEPs, lots of committees, official organisations dealing with complaints in the EU and against UK government are swamped with emails, letters and calls from the claimants.

So, the battles continue and the war progresses.  Major mistake by HMG taking on a load of baby boomers with years of organisational, business and professional lives behind them - still, something to do though a wet winter for the claimants I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Tony I watched the PM the other day saying essentially that services in future will become internet based and that would be good for both claimants and those who are administering the claims!!!

Again he said that it was important to allow civil servants to make decisions and to engage with claimants as against simply processing claims.

After the DLA experience I was aghast.

This long standing card holding Labour Party guy believes that lots of true socialists are now turning in their graves.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="dragonrouge"] This long standing card holding Labour Party guy believes that lots of true socialists are now turning in their graves.[/quote]Yes, dr.  If I read again anything saying this government is left wing I shall scream even more loudly.

Good luck Tony and co with your work on this.  I'm sorry we couldn't have helped a bit but as you know FHI has somewhat imploded now that Jack is alright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just to bump this and update.

There are now well over 350 cases pending Lower Tribunal hearings, all of which have been bundled by the DWP to be decided by 4 test cases, currently slated for 4 March 2010 in London.  This is, of course, after the DWP have refused to implement previous Upper Tribunal decisions on the same reasons to refuse benefits, which are now case law, telling claimants that every case is individual and that they can't be linked.

There is a rumour going round that the DWP have also said if they loose in March. they will appeal to the Upper Tribunal - where they have lost the only two cases to be heard and have withdrawn from the others slated at the UT, thereby admitting defeat - and if they loose there, they will go to the Supreme Court.

This is not, at this stage, even a remote possibility because the DWP do not know if they have grounds to appeal, especially as the EU has started infringement proceedings on one of the two main arguments being used by HMG, having already stated that what HMG is doing is unlawful.

All of this evasion and prevaracation is, unfortunately and very sadly, too late for some of the people involved in the campaign because they have died or are very close to death.

However, the fight continues and HMG should remember that the claims of those who die remain part of their estate so even after they've gone, they can still be around to bite them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Tony thanks for the update. As you rightly say it is a sad indictment of HMG and the clowns and I say clowns at Blackpool. Again the estate of a deceased still has the right to continue the fight and it does not end with death.

Tony I am going to be in London around about the 4th and with all Tribunals it will be open to the public or come to think about it the ones that I have been to in the past have always been private and for obvious reasons. These however are on points of law so should be open. Could you kindly let me have the address and I will see if I can be there.

Recently came across my appeal documents for Linda and another claimant the other day. Quite different then.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Bumping and new information - Norman, please don't read this thread, you'll only get upset at the immorality of the people campaiging for their rights.

Roger Gale, Conservative MP for Thanet North, managed to get himself on the Agenda for an Adjournemnt Debate in Parliament yesterday morning and not only did he say his bit but in addition a number of other MPs who weighed in also made some very valid points.  HMG wheeled out the hapless Minister, Jonathan Shaw, who just trotted out the party line, obviously was not on top of his brief and according to some campaigners who watched it via a live stream, seemed very ill at ease.

The Debate, which was strongly supported by the Conservative Party who have let it be known that if they win the next election, they will not only comply with the ECJ ruling and pay up in full but will also backdate payments to the original date of disallowance, including one speaker from Cameron's office who was very vocal in support.

The Debate is on the UK Parliament Channel Sky 504 on Saturday morning at 7.am France time, 6am UK time.

The Hansard report is here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmwhall/01.htm

The tide is certainly turning against HMG now, the publicity is building (last Sunday this was reported in Sunday Telegraph) and various television/radio sources are picking it up.  And the relatives of those who have died are now starting to get angry about this issue and HMG will get even more bad publicity from that little part of the fiasco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Tony I have no doubt that Norman will let us know in due course his views.

My views in all of this are well documented and I went on line early to say that in my legal opinion HMG had nowhere to go and our Common Law system should and would take this matter back to the position where claimants were before they left the UK. Perhaps Norman would it be helpful for you to consider that HMG are paying child allowance from guys who are resident in the UK but whose children are in say Poland?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...