Tribunal Victory

dwpexamination forum now available at http://dwpexaminations.blacktrianglecampaign.org/phpBB3/

Hello again readers, here it is as promised. A report on my alleged “examination”, my appeal and consequent Tribunal. I apologise for the delay but my health has not been good of late and I have had other priorities to deal with.

As I sat waiting to be seen, a man came out of a darkened room to my right and in front of me, I didn’t know at the time he was my examining Doctor. I could not see clearly into the darkened room, there didn’t appear to be any windows, if there were they were blacked out. I imagined this was the observation room from where your entrance to the building could be watched as could the waiting room. CCTV is a great tool for gathering evidence….He walked past me, went to his room, waited a few minutes, came to the door then called my name…..

The “Healthcare professional” followed me into his office obviously observing me from the word go. He introduced himself, asked me to take a seat and said he was going to ask me questions relating to the information I had provided on my ib50 form. Choosing to ignore the glaringly obvious reason for my claim, his ‘examination’ began with questions relating to several other minor ailments I had listed. I later realised that these were the easiest to dismiss thus proving I was a liar (In his eyes anyway).

Apart from establishing I had, had major surgery within the last 6 months, no further interest was shown in its consequences, and no actual physical examination around this surgery took place. He then asked where arthritic pain was, which joints it affected, but did not investigate sciatica. He eventually asked if arthritis was getting worse. I said it had, and was not improving at all.

Next he carried out the briefest examination of my ankle (this consisted of prodding my lower shin with his index finger) More attention was paid to the movement of joints in wrist, back, arms, neck and head. He then asked me to bend my knees outward and lower myself (rather like a ballet move) which I told him I could not do and as a “Doctor” the reasons should have been glaringly obvious. I was also asked to climb (up 2 narrow steps) onto a bed and raise my legs as far as I could, I asked Dr to help me rise, but had to get up myself. The alleged “Healthcare professional” ignored my request for help and made no effort to help me rise? He then took my blood pressure and felt my pulse, (he couldn’t have taken its rhythm as he did not hold long enough).

I showed him my appointment letters for my operations and visits to specialists; however he seemed totally disinterested and said he could not ask to see them even though the letter I received asked me to bring them with me?

He asked me what I would do if “they” offered me a job now. I said it would be physically impossible at present as I am still recovering from my operation and other issues, however, I made it plain to him I had no intentions of remaining on benefits and hoped to return to work as soon as possible, which may take time given my present condition. He asked if I preferred full or part time work, I said full time but the likelihood would be part time to begin with. I also said I had an advisor at Jobcentre plus who is working with me to find suitable work.

He asked me if I watched T.V., Not much I replied, How about Radio, Almost never, Newspapers, No, books , got one for xmas, haven’t read it. Do you go to the pub, club, Pictures, theatre or restaurant rarely was my reply. He asked if I did any gardening (I thought this was a stupid question for an allegedly educated man), no, do I have any hobbies, apart from the internet, no. He seemed surprised and sceptical at my replies and gave me the impression he did not believe me! He also asked who was with me. I found this an odd question but courteously replied “a friend”.

During the examination the alleged “Doctor” asked both closed questions and (as I later established) rather “fluid” questions in a manner which was clearly designed to confuse the claimant, and which sometimes demanded a contradictory response to previous questions. I found this very disconcerting and frustrating.

Do you drive?

What kind of car do you have?

Who do you do your shopping with?

Who does the cooking at home?

How did you get here?

How long did your journey take?

On completion of the so called examination the Doctor asked if I had anything to add, I said my piece, which was firmly ignored and he ended the examination by focusing on his computer screen and dismissing me like a naughty child. I persisted and asked if we could go through his responses and make sure there were no inconsistencies. He immediately looked uncomfortable, cleared his throat and mumbled he did not have time and a copy of his report would be sent to the decision maker. I left, knowing he had done everything he could to stop my claim.

I requested a copy of the report and appealed within the month.

The appeal

When I received the report I could not believe my eyes, it was laced with assumptions, lies and other glaring inconsistencies which bordered on the ridiculous. I went through the report with a fine toothed comb over the following week or so. I knew I would make a mess of appealing if I tried to do it in one go so I deliberately took my time.

Day one:  First I copied it then I looked at all of the entries the alleged “Doctor” had made. I marked those I considered to be untrue first, then those that were assumptions, then those that were down right lies. I stopped there too angry to go on

Day two: I wrote the opening statement of my appeal and commented on the untruths first by asking how the “Doctor” had arrived at his prognosis, without testing my physical ability. A good example was his lie I could climb stairs without problems.

Day three: Next I dealt with the assumptions, entries he had made on a whim. A good example was the answer saying I used a mobile phone to make arrangements and text friends.

Day four: Next I dealt with the lies. A good example was that I could walk 400 yards without problems, despite the fact I was using a stick and I made it clear it was substantially less during the “examination”.

Day five: I spent about an hour double and treble checking my work. I had listed around 20 entries I was challenging. Satisfied I had done the best I could I gave a friend of mine a look and he pointed out two other items, which I added to the appeal.

Several months later, I received my tribunal date. Having taken advice from UKBIX I contacted the Local Authority who arranged a meeting with a representative. The first time we met we discussed my case in detail and assessed its merits and from that gauged our chances of success. It was 60/40 in my favour. This was mainly due to inconsistencies in his report to the Decision maker, his gross misdiagnosis of my condition and fitness level, his obvious assumptions and glaring lies.

A second meeting was arranged for the day before the tribunal, by this time I had my anger at the alleged “Doctor” under control and had accepted the idea that the Tribunal members were genuinely independent of the DWP and ATOS and were there to listen to the evidence I gave and make a decision based upon the facts before them. Make no mistake, these people are not easily fooled and will recognise those who are trying to defraud the system. Equally, if you are a credible witness, answer their questions clearly and precisely and are honest the chances are they will find in your favour.

It is important to remember that the Tribunal, in my case consisting of 2 members (3 is not unusual), one a Doctor the other a Judge and that they are not the enemy. With that in mind you can rest assured that your case will be heard fairly and amicably. The judge will defer to the Doctor and may occasionally ask you a question.

After introductions the hearing will began. The Tribunal established a time period upon which I had to focus when answering my questions. I was asked about how I felt then and that was compared to how I felt now. I assumed that this was to establish weather my condition was the same, worse or better. In my case I was a lot better than at the time of the examination and said so. The questions were asked very clearly and precisely. The Doctor and Judge listened carefully to my answers and after around five, maybe six questions the Judge asked for a break to make their decision. I left the room with my representative, we were called back in after about five minutes and informed that the Tribunal had overturned the “Doctors” decision and had awarded me well over 40 points. This was a massive victory and represented a ten fold increase in the number of points the “Healthcare Professional” had given me on the day of my examination.

Remember, the Tribunal is independent of the body against which you are appealing or have a grievance with. They are very astute people who will recognise you have been wrongly diagnosed and restore your benefits if they see fit. Equally if you are swinging the lead, the will notice this too and will react accordingly. Be patient, take any evidence you can with you and above all, get help. Do not go alone, do not go in with all guns blazing, simply be yourself. It is important to come across as a credible witness and to tell the truth.

My benefits were restored within 2 weeks and I have had no problems since, although I expect they will have me in again. Only this time I’ll be even more prepared……