Post by nickd on Feb 25, 2011 11:40:07 GMT 1
With all this reform talk going on, it's easy to get a little lost in all of this and become distracted from what it's really all about, helping people with problems which require specialist knowledge, far from the 'basic stuff' politicians will have you believe we do.
Just thinking back to some of the cases I've covered in the last week alone. These have included....
Complicated advice to two separate clients following a referral from a family solicitor, both of these cases involved the complexities of clients trapped in a situation where they can't move from the home for fear of the consequences of partners who have been violent towards them; physically and emotionally. Their enquiries concerned whether they can get state support if they remain under the same roof, the situation they both find themselves in until such times as occupational orders can be obtained getting the partners to move out. Both cases highlighted problems with debts and how liabilities like the mortgage would be decided, one concerned inevitable bankruptcy as the debts incurred against the mother are all in her name - her partner saddling her with them and the children, but using financial dependency as emotional blackmail to keep them together.
A Disability Living Allowance renewal for a complicated partial seizure epileptic. We had to go through the rounds of an appeal to get our client the benefit in the first place and we think help is justified to make sure the renewal goes through as smoothly as possible so as to avoid the trauma of another appeal. At the last appeal, the award was granted by the Tribunal with full agreement of the presenting officer, - the Tribunal saw first hand how my client was close to convulsion at the hearing, they awarded middle rate care and lower mobility component of Disability without the need to take evidence, they commented on how they were helped by our detailed submission with full supporting evidence.
A case for Employment and Support Allowance appeal for a young mum who seems cheerful enough until you probe the issues. She'd dearly love to work but the childhood effects of sexual abuse haunt her to the point where she can be terrified by the sight of men of a certain appearance. She has had extensive mental health treatment and the support of social services and a mental health worker. The last hearing was adjourned and I therefore went through the evidence again in readiness for another hearing. My client clearly found it difficult and admitted she was petrified at going to the hearing, even though she had a support worker to help her through it. You've only got to speak to her in sufficient depth to realize there are real problems here, the tears and look of fear serve to remind you of the profound effect this is having on her. She's doing what she can to rebuild her live by doing some voluntary work in a charity shop, it's a shame the DWP's healthcare professional spent more time looking at her computer during the brief 23 minute medical examination than talking to her, had she done so - she'd have come to a different conclusion. I was confident she'd win her appeal the following day, indeed I rated her prospects of success at 98%. She telephoned the Tribunal Service on the morning of her hearing, it's a good job she did as she was told the hearing couldn't go ahead due to the non-availability of a panel member. This was deeply distressing to the client because she'd got all psyched up and prepared, she'd worried about it all night; her support worker has been told she may not be able to go to the next one as each trip takes her out of being able to do her other work for 5 lost hours, I can see their point.
Then I had a client from another family solicitor referral, this time a foreigner who came in with a friend to act as an interpretor, another victim of domestic violence - to a point where I was asked to send all letters to her friend for fear her partner would open them. The family solicitor is seeking an anti-molestation order and the client's partner is due to be arrested as soon as he returns from a few days away, my client doesn't know where he is and fears his return. She's caught by complicated rules of entitlement, she doesn't want to go to a refuge with her two young children, I can understand that - but trying telling that to the violent partner who only gives her money when she tows the line and regards the family home as 'his home'. It's my job to wade through the Income Support general regulations, a not too onerous task given how I've been here before. I've briefed my client on the obstacles she'll face when attempting to claim via the 'first contact' processing centre, insist on face to face I say and take your interpretor friend - you'll need her I say.
Another Employment and Support Allowance appeal follows, this one already in the 'user friendly' tribunal pipeline. Except the tribunal didn't seem to think it's user friendly, as they adjourned it to allow my client to seek specialist help. The client has a complicated condition and a troubled past, despite the help of her brother - the sea of unresolved paperwork tells me they need this knocking into shape ready for the next hearing. It's difficult for the client is this one, because her mortgage arrears accrue as the DWP have ceased payment of the interest help. A submission will help it on its way, I'll add it to the increasing pile of blue folders which get thicker as the case progresses, 'oh how basic this all is' I chuckle. Quite a few things wrong with this one, not least the total lack of supporting medical evidence the client has already sent the DWP - omitted from papers; that's handy I note.
I'm not making this up you know, oh no - it's all true, read on....
In walks a nervous client, she looks sad and worried. I bring my probing inquisitorial approach into play. She's frightened witless by a DWP investigator who has already interviewed her twice over the last year - like an annual 'review' conducted on the grounds of little more than suspicion; all because someone's made an 'anonymous' allegation. Not enough evidence to warrant an interview under caution, not enough evidence to suspend benefit, shall I make an official complaint I ask my client? We agree not to as it may just put the investigator on even more of a mission, I think my client has every ground to complain but I can understand why she doesn't want to. We agree to hold off, but I tell my client to come back to me if she has any more hassle and we'll read them the riot act. My client tells me she fears going anywhere, she assures me she's nothing to hide and I believe her, what she tells me is credible, we're not daft you know. It's a shame the DWP investigators don't always go after the real culprits, they seem to prefer claimants with severe depression because its easy to assume they are fakers - I dare say. There are good and bad investigators, some just see it as their duty to give people a hard time - others play it by the book and do it all properly.
I'm not going to bore you with the rest of the week, suffice to say it includes much of the same, including more preparation work on a couple of big complicated overpayment cases which are currently 'adjourned on directions'by the Tribunals, these cases now respectively fill two and three thick lever arch files rather than the thin blue folders we start off with.
All of this goes on alongside meetings, supervising my hardworking team, watching targets and key performance indicators, reviewing my upper tribunal caseload. I think the only programme I got to see this week from start to finish was a new one on the law - courtroom stuff called 'Silk' - I liked that, oh and Question Time; - that just annoys me- especially when I hear politicians talk of their blessed cuts and 'efficiency' savings.
But the bit that really gets me - is all of this, the need to justify our existence by writing pieces like this. I'll do it because I believe in what we do, ultimately people need to know what it is we do. Some people don't have a clue what all of this entails, part of me would love to leave this at the door of politicians who say we're good willing - but not needed, I''d love to see how they cope, I think they'd soon wish they'd never said to cut legal aid if they had all this to deal with. Now we're a passionate lot Mr Djanogly, we do our job well and we know what we're doing, now why don't you see sense and just leave us alone?
Just thinking back to some of the cases I've covered in the last week alone. These have included....
Complicated advice to two separate clients following a referral from a family solicitor, both of these cases involved the complexities of clients trapped in a situation where they can't move from the home for fear of the consequences of partners who have been violent towards them; physically and emotionally. Their enquiries concerned whether they can get state support if they remain under the same roof, the situation they both find themselves in until such times as occupational orders can be obtained getting the partners to move out. Both cases highlighted problems with debts and how liabilities like the mortgage would be decided, one concerned inevitable bankruptcy as the debts incurred against the mother are all in her name - her partner saddling her with them and the children, but using financial dependency as emotional blackmail to keep them together.
A Disability Living Allowance renewal for a complicated partial seizure epileptic. We had to go through the rounds of an appeal to get our client the benefit in the first place and we think help is justified to make sure the renewal goes through as smoothly as possible so as to avoid the trauma of another appeal. At the last appeal, the award was granted by the Tribunal with full agreement of the presenting officer, - the Tribunal saw first hand how my client was close to convulsion at the hearing, they awarded middle rate care and lower mobility component of Disability without the need to take evidence, they commented on how they were helped by our detailed submission with full supporting evidence.
A case for Employment and Support Allowance appeal for a young mum who seems cheerful enough until you probe the issues. She'd dearly love to work but the childhood effects of sexual abuse haunt her to the point where she can be terrified by the sight of men of a certain appearance. She has had extensive mental health treatment and the support of social services and a mental health worker. The last hearing was adjourned and I therefore went through the evidence again in readiness for another hearing. My client clearly found it difficult and admitted she was petrified at going to the hearing, even though she had a support worker to help her through it. You've only got to speak to her in sufficient depth to realize there are real problems here, the tears and look of fear serve to remind you of the profound effect this is having on her. She's doing what she can to rebuild her live by doing some voluntary work in a charity shop, it's a shame the DWP's healthcare professional spent more time looking at her computer during the brief 23 minute medical examination than talking to her, had she done so - she'd have come to a different conclusion. I was confident she'd win her appeal the following day, indeed I rated her prospects of success at 98%. She telephoned the Tribunal Service on the morning of her hearing, it's a good job she did as she was told the hearing couldn't go ahead due to the non-availability of a panel member. This was deeply distressing to the client because she'd got all psyched up and prepared, she'd worried about it all night; her support worker has been told she may not be able to go to the next one as each trip takes her out of being able to do her other work for 5 lost hours, I can see their point.
Then I had a client from another family solicitor referral, this time a foreigner who came in with a friend to act as an interpretor, another victim of domestic violence - to a point where I was asked to send all letters to her friend for fear her partner would open them. The family solicitor is seeking an anti-molestation order and the client's partner is due to be arrested as soon as he returns from a few days away, my client doesn't know where he is and fears his return. She's caught by complicated rules of entitlement, she doesn't want to go to a refuge with her two young children, I can understand that - but trying telling that to the violent partner who only gives her money when she tows the line and regards the family home as 'his home'. It's my job to wade through the Income Support general regulations, a not too onerous task given how I've been here before. I've briefed my client on the obstacles she'll face when attempting to claim via the 'first contact' processing centre, insist on face to face I say and take your interpretor friend - you'll need her I say.
Another Employment and Support Allowance appeal follows, this one already in the 'user friendly' tribunal pipeline. Except the tribunal didn't seem to think it's user friendly, as they adjourned it to allow my client to seek specialist help. The client has a complicated condition and a troubled past, despite the help of her brother - the sea of unresolved paperwork tells me they need this knocking into shape ready for the next hearing. It's difficult for the client is this one, because her mortgage arrears accrue as the DWP have ceased payment of the interest help. A submission will help it on its way, I'll add it to the increasing pile of blue folders which get thicker as the case progresses, 'oh how basic this all is' I chuckle. Quite a few things wrong with this one, not least the total lack of supporting medical evidence the client has already sent the DWP - omitted from papers; that's handy I note.
I'm not making this up you know, oh no - it's all true, read on....
In walks a nervous client, she looks sad and worried. I bring my probing inquisitorial approach into play. She's frightened witless by a DWP investigator who has already interviewed her twice over the last year - like an annual 'review' conducted on the grounds of little more than suspicion; all because someone's made an 'anonymous' allegation. Not enough evidence to warrant an interview under caution, not enough evidence to suspend benefit, shall I make an official complaint I ask my client? We agree not to as it may just put the investigator on even more of a mission, I think my client has every ground to complain but I can understand why she doesn't want to. We agree to hold off, but I tell my client to come back to me if she has any more hassle and we'll read them the riot act. My client tells me she fears going anywhere, she assures me she's nothing to hide and I believe her, what she tells me is credible, we're not daft you know. It's a shame the DWP investigators don't always go after the real culprits, they seem to prefer claimants with severe depression because its easy to assume they are fakers - I dare say. There are good and bad investigators, some just see it as their duty to give people a hard time - others play it by the book and do it all properly.
I'm not going to bore you with the rest of the week, suffice to say it includes much of the same, including more preparation work on a couple of big complicated overpayment cases which are currently 'adjourned on directions'by the Tribunals, these cases now respectively fill two and three thick lever arch files rather than the thin blue folders we start off with.
All of this goes on alongside meetings, supervising my hardworking team, watching targets and key performance indicators, reviewing my upper tribunal caseload. I think the only programme I got to see this week from start to finish was a new one on the law - courtroom stuff called 'Silk' - I liked that, oh and Question Time; - that just annoys me- especially when I hear politicians talk of their blessed cuts and 'efficiency' savings.
But the bit that really gets me - is all of this, the need to justify our existence by writing pieces like this. I'll do it because I believe in what we do, ultimately people need to know what it is we do. Some people don't have a clue what all of this entails, part of me would love to leave this at the door of politicians who say we're good willing - but not needed, I''d love to see how they cope, I think they'd soon wish they'd never said to cut legal aid if they had all this to deal with. Now we're a passionate lot Mr Djanogly, we do our job well and we know what we're doing, now why don't you see sense and just leave us alone?