|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:27:44 GMT 1
Benefit check invaluable « Thread Started on Feb 9, 2011, 10:16am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Having been unable to work due to ill health and surviving on just £134 Child Tax Credit a week for nearly three months Mr N sought advice from Bolton Citizens Advice to see if they could help with his benefits. Mr N and his family had put in a claim for Child Benefit but had still not heard anything after a year. Mr N had also been refused Employment and Support Allowance. Bolton CAB were able to chase his Child Benefit claim and advise him to claim Income Support which was the correct benefit for him. Without this additional income his family were in danger of going in to debt. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=174#ixzz1NgWWhPVW
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:28:31 GMT 1
Lost without you « Thread Started on Feb 9, 2011, 9:54am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Miss M was only too willing to tell me her experience of Bolton CAB - "I have had a lot of help from the Citizens Advice Bureau and I have got to know all the staff. I have been homeless and they have helped me with benefits and debt advice. If the Citizens Advice Bureau were not around I don't know where I would be, I would be lost without them" Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=173#ixzz1NgWkeHA0
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:29:17 GMT 1
Early debt advice puts people on the right track « Thread Started on Feb 9, 2011, 9:45am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr B visited Bolton Citizens Advice Bureau recently and received advice on several debts he had. The advisor ensured that he knew which debts he needed to pay off first and how to deal with his debts in the future. Without this free advice Mr B would have been left in a situation that could have resulted in him losing his home. He was also reassured that he could return to CAB if he needed any further assistance. Bolton CAB assist people like Mr B everyday and it is becoming an increasing problem in todays climate of cuts and loss of employment. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=172#ixzz1NgWv2Bae
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:30:22 GMT 1
Bolton CAB help to re-home my son « Thread Started on Feb 9, 2011, 9:31am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mrs W's son was homeless and had been living at the Salvation Army until they were no longer able to accommodate him. Bolton Citizens Advice Bureau were able to assist him with the relevant form and enable him to get back in to the Salvation Army within the same day. Without this assistance he may have ended up on the streets as there did not appear to be anyone else willing to help him in his hour of need. The Government's proposal to cut Legal Aid would be highly detrimental to the future of this valuable service. « Last Edit: Feb 9, 2011, 9:49am by kbricknell » Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=171#ixzz1NgXDcobK
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:31:32 GMT 1
Mrs M and the tax credit office « Thread Started on Feb 7, 2011, 3:43pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following is an example of work done by a caseworker helping some one through the complexities of dealing with HMRC and also the Tribunals Service. HMRC deal with tax credits and the Tribunals Service arrange independent appeal hearings Mrs M works for 30 hours per week in an office in a care home. Prior to her employment, she was in receipt of Incapacity Benefit (IB) because she suffers from a severe shoulder injury. Mrs M now has a specially adapted chair at work and cannot do any lifting. Mrs M has been in receipt of Working Tax Credit which included the disability element. She is entitled to this element because she was in receipt of IB immediately preceding her claim and she has a disability which puts her at a disadvantage in getting a job. (point 20 – she cannot normally sustain an 8 hour working day or a five day working week due to a medical condition or intermittent or continuous severe pain). Mrs M received a letter from HMRC dated 12 October 2009 stating that they had made an error because they had not asked her to renew her claim after 5 April 2008. She was asked to make a new claim. When she received her new award it did not include the disability element. Mrs M immediately queried this. The legislation states that if a claimant makes a claim for WTC within 56 days of the day the previous award ended, and in that earlier claim they qualified for the disability element, they will be treated as though they still met the conditions and can continue to receive the disability element in the new award. HMRC have said that the appeal out of time as the award letter was sent to client in October 2009 - Mrs M maintains she appealed as soon as she could. This has been passed to Tribunals Service for a decision by a Judge as an 'interlocutory referral' - the Judge will decide if the appeal can go ahead. Mrs M immediately queried this decision with HMRC, who did not respond in writing with an explanation until 11 June 2010 - Mrs M appealed decision within 30 days of receipt of this decision letter. This letter from HMRC actually invites her to make the appeal and now says she's out of time. Caseworker wrote to the Tribunals Service explaining the above circumstances and detailing errors by HMRC. No response from has been received from them to date. This matter was opened 19/8/10 and is still ongoing. Mrs M states that without our help she would not be able to cope with challenging the HMRC or dealing with the Tribunal Service. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=168#ixzz1NgXUJzsF
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:33:35 GMT 1
A brick through the window of advice: Andy's story « Thread Started on Feb 8, 2011, 1:25pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Legal problems do not happen in isolation. By this, we don't mean that if someone has one legal problem they are likely to have other associated problems eg someone with welfare benefit problems being likely to have debts. Whilst this is generally true, when we use the phrase "do not happen in isolation" here, we mean that the consequences of one person experiencing a problem can have far wider ranging significances, to friends, colleagues and the community Here someone was unable to pay their rent. Housing Benefit had ceased payments and the landlord took action, but not legal action. This type of illegal eviction is all too common In this case study concerning Andrew, a part-time worker on a low wage and his young family, Gloucester Law Centre didn't just sort out his families eviction and housing benefit problems; by doing so, they resolved a dispute that had spilled over into the community Just think: how would you react if your wife rang you at work crying, saying that the landlord had changed the locks on your home. Your partner and children are literally in the street. You have little or no money and no family to turn to. What would you do? Where would you go? Here is Andrew's story: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew lived had been living with his family in a rented property for 2 years when his Housing Benefit came up for review Unfortunately, he experienced difficulty in securing evidence from his employer and, as a consequence, his Housing Benefit was cancelled As soon as the payments ceased Andrew's landlord began to harass him for his rent, phoning him at all hours of the day and using threatening and abusive language This escalated to a brick being thrown through the window terrifying the family. A few days later Mr A was then phoned at work by his wife to say that they had been locked out of the house. They went to the law centre as they had no-one else to turn to We contacted the landlord explaining the illegality of his actions and the potential consequences of his actions should he not let the tenant and his family back into the property immediately With no response from the landlord we sought alternative accommodation for the client, meanwhile securing legal aid to obtain an injunction from the County Court to compel the landlord to let Andrew and his family back into the property Andrew and family were restored to the property and the Court awarded damages and costs to him in order to compensate him for the landlord’s behaviour We (Gloucester Law Centre) also resolved the issue around the Housing Benefit and the claim was reinstated to the correct amount, resolving both the arrears and ongoing liability issues -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Have you worked out what you would have done if in a similar position to Andrew yet? Bear in mind that law centres nationally are now under serious threat of closure given the Governments current plans to reform legal aid - effectively, throwing a brick through the window of advice and damning the consequences « Last Edit: Feb 8, 2011, 1:26pm by Patrick » Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=166#ixzz1NgY192U1
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:35:01 GMT 1
Frank: legal advice brings money into communities « Thread Started on Feb 7, 2011, 2:45pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Much of the discussion about whether there should be legal aid focusses on the complexity of the issue and the benefits to the individual client. The case study below illustrates both the complexity point and also the immediate benefit to the client However, there is another point that should be made. This is money coming in to not only the client's pocket and home but money coming into an area, a community, a town, a village, a city. This is money that will be spent in paper shops, lauderettes, clothes stores, on food and many other things. A significant proportion of the money that someone is entitled to being paid after legal advice is money that goes back into the economy of the community in one way or another Here is Frank's story -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frank had lost his sight in an industrial accident. He approached us because he was concerned that he was not receiving his correct entitlement to benefits and was on the verge of being evicted from his home and wasn't sure what to do He was not receiving Income Support because Jobcentre Plus were wrongly assuming that he was still getting Statutory Sick Pay, he had only been awarded the lowest rate of the care component of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) even though it was clear to us that he should be getting the middle rate The DLA decision had been made more than 8 months before Frank came to see us but the agency who had helped him to originally make his claim had not advised him that he should appeal We helped Frank to lodge a late appeal, which was accepted and then represented him at a tribunal which agreed that he was entitled to the middle rate of the care component As a consequence of our involvement Frank was awarded arrears of benefit totalling £7370 and is now getting an additional £81.30 per week in Income Support and DLA Frank had originally sought help from another (non legal aid provider) agency but they had not picked up either of the issuesIt was clear to us that Frank could not have resolved these issues without our assistance The last we heard from Frank, he was doing fine. He said he has now paid off his mortgage arrears and is much better able to keep up with his regular payments The payment Gloucester Law Centre received for this case? £167, the standard fixed fee for a Welfare Benefits matter. Exactly the kind of matter that the Government is proposing to stop funding « Last Edit: Feb 7, 2011, 2:46pm by Patrick » Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=164#ixzz1NgYO5BqR
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:35:49 GMT 1
We are not paying your wages, like it or lump it! « Thread Started on Feb 7, 2011, 10:33am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is another case study from Gloucester Law Centre, this one an Employment case We must remember that the recent proposals for legal aid reform propose to remove all work of this type from the scope of public funding. This means that if you have any difficulties at work, such as not being paid your wages or being sacked on trumped up charges or because someone doesn't like you, you will no longer be able to qualify for assistance in trying to resolve the matter -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr K, who is Kenyan and speaks limited English, had been dismissed after 6 years service. His employer had also failed to pay his final months wages and accrued holiday pay The employer concerned was known to the Law Centre as this was one of a spate of similar cases in which this company had failed to meet its obligations The Law Centre advised Mr K that he should not pursue a claim for unfair dismissal as the case was, unfortunately, not strong enough, but nevertheless he was certainly entitled to receive the wages for the work he had done and his holiday pay that had accrued We tried to resolve the matter through correspondence but the company ignored all our letters and the pay owed to Mr K was still not forthcoming With no option left, we therefore assisted Mr K to commence Tribunal proceedings and we pursued the matter on his behalf A week before the hearing was due, the company finally admitted they owed the money and paid Mr K the approx £1000 he was owed There was no way that Mr K would not have been able to achieve this result without our help. Like the vast majority of people in the street, Mr K did not understanding the legal system. All he knew was that he had done a months work for a big company who now said he couldn't have the money he had 'earned' and refused to entertain any further discussion with him It is worth remembering also that employers generally employ solicitors and barristers to argue cases on their behalf, knowing that the legalities of the process can tear people who try to represent themselves apart. This is just another bar to accessing justice in Employment cases We are also hopeful that our intervention in Mr K's case and other similar cases involving this particular employer will have a wider positive impact in that the employer will get the message and start meeting its obligations without the need for us to be involved What we got paid for all this work? The standard fixed fee (the way cases like this are paid ie this is what you get however much work you do and however long the case takes): £230 Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=163#ixzz1NgYZcKmt
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:36:48 GMT 1
Ms H: early advice saves home & tax payers money « Thread Started on Feb 1, 2011, 12:25pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is another example of how a small amount of legal aid funded work at an early stage can help avoid costly legal proceedings further on down the line In the story of Ms H below, a client who attended Gloucester Law Centre recently, early legal intervention prevented costly possession proceedings being commenced and increased spend of legal aid monies Under the current reform proposals, intervention like this will no longer be funded. However, the Government says it will keep legal aid for defending possession proceedings. Effectively, it is proposing to get rid of work that is cost effective to the tax payer and parties involved, and retain only the most expensive aspect, that of defending formal court proceedings further on down the line -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms H who is disabled and unable to work through ill-health and also has a disabled child. She came to the law centre because she was struggling financially and was being threatened with possession action because of rent arrears We checked Ms H’s housing benefit entitlement and discovered that she had been significantly underpaid since her child had been awarded Disability Living Allowance the previous year. She had notified the housing benefit section of this but they had in error failed to increase her housing benefit by including a Disabled Child Premium to which she had become entitled Ms H had no idea that she was entitled to this additional payment and had assumed that the local authority had acted on the information she had provided and assessed her benefit correctly After we took this up with the local authority an arrears payment of approximately £2000 was made, which not only cleared her arrears but put her rent account into credit Our early intervention at a cost of only £174 (the fixed fee that can be claimed for Housing cases such as this) therefore avoided the need for expensive court action and the possible expenditure of much larger amounts of legal aid on a certificate to defend the possession proceedings at a later stage had the problem not been resolved so soon Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=141#ixzz1NgYqDeu0
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:37:53 GMT 1
'Basic Advice' - Get Real Mr Clarke! « Thread Started on Jan 31, 2011, 9:39pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Today I received a letter which pleased me greatly, it gave me a lift - always a good way to start a Monday, however, the same letter also angered me. The letter was from someone I'll call Mr Tom. Mr Tom approached us a good while ago, he was facing allegations of benefit fraud, he'd been caught out working and claiming. Despite his crime Mr Tom struck me as a genuinely open and up front man. He'd battled with addiction to drugs such as cocaine, heroine for many years - it happens to people. Mr Tom accepted drugs had scrambled his head, he'd been to hell and back, - drugs had become his master. Despite his crime, he held his family together - loving his family dearly. He was actually pleased he got caught, it's complicated to explain why but it all made sense when he explained it to me. Mr Tom accepted he'd done wrong, he wanted to come clean, he knew he was facing a very serious situation, he told me how he was sick of looking over his shoulder. He wanted to make a fresh start, he'd managed to kick his habit and now wanted to regain some of the life he'd lost - but he realised that before he could move on he needed to pay a price for his wrongs, it struck me as honourable. There was no denial, he put his hands up to it all, no harsh interview under caution was needed, he couldn't have been more cooperative with the prosecuting authorities - you'd think people would be entitled to be given credit for confessing their sins. Paying the price was important to Mr Tom - it was part of the rehabilitation and recovery process. Mr Tom came to see us, we work closely in conjunction with criminal defence solicitors - they rely on us at CAB for our specialist knowledge on welfare benefit cases, we often work as a team. They do their bit, we do ours. We've even attended the Crown Court as expert witnesses for them - our specialist knowledge has met the Crown Court test. One of the problems we identified in this case - concerning an overpayment of £52,000 in overpaid state benefits - was the accuracy of the way the DWP had worked out the amount and the way they had arrived at their decision. I felt there was a case on the basis of using argument connected with a dispute over the earnings figures, the fact the DWP hadn't taken into account the correct lower and upper permitted working periods and issues connected with a dispute over 'assumed earnings' relating to seasonal work. I tell you this kind of case is complicated Mr Clarke, far more than you seem to think. It requires methodical attention and a knowledge of the law relating to the assessment of income. An appeal was made - after months, the DWP made a cursory response; providing me with two lines of wording as their 'full statement of reasons' behind their decision. I rejected their reasons as inadequate and demanded more. In the mean time the DWP was keen to get on and prosecute Mr Tom, they wanted to throw the book at him. Mr Tom subsequently entered a plea of Guilty - the DWP were pushing hard to get Mr Tom sentenced in the Crown Court; the DWP wanted to use Mr Tom as an example. I contacted the criminal lawyers, they tried to get an adjournment until the appeal over the overpayment was heard. The Crown Court wouldn't agree to wait; Mr Tom was sentenced to a term of 18 months imprisonment, it was immediate custody - in a blaze of publicity - horrible publicity. Some would say he deserved it, it's not for me to judgemental - it's my job to be impartial and to advise upon the law - people like Mr Tom are judged enough without us adding our own moral equation - we just get on with the job. I rang Mrs Tom, she was shocked but resigned to the inevitable, the DWP had plastered their glee all over the paper, all over the internet, the comments were cruel. The word benefit fraudster always looks good in the headlines, the public seem to love it. The appeal had to go on hold as far as Mr Tom was concerned, but not as far as I was concerned. I went through the calculations - it took many hours, the DWP's case was flawed in a number of areas- and yet Mr Tom was in prison. He feared prison would be the place where he'd end up tempted back onto the toxic drugs which he'd cleansed himself of - this was his biggest fear. Complicated (yes complicated - Mr Clarke) submissions were made - they were the subject of numerous directions being issued in the First Tier Tribunal. The place our politician's think are 'user friendly' - they are - but not to a point where users don't need legal help - believe me, they do. A decision was made to wait until Mr Tom was released from prison. When he came out, he'd lost his sun tan - he looked gaunt, but he was okay, he'd dealt with it well, he felt he'd paid the price for his crime - and yes he realised it was a crime. Yet, he still wanted to battle on. He wanted to pay back what he owed - but only what he owed. And so the case came to a final hearing, the Tribunal allowed the appeal - they agreed the DWP was wrong and referred the amount back to the DWP for a recalculation with guidance - in the form of very detailed directions - on how to calculate the overpayment. Mr Tom carried on paying the amount back at the amount he had agreed, he wanted to pay back the overpayment and had no qualms over doing so. He made very reasonable repayments but awaited the revised calculation with patience. The DWP didn't tell him what the revised amount was, but today he sent - with his letter - confirmation that the overpayment had been reduced from £52,000 to £23,553.78- still a substantial sum but under half the original amount. The DWP didn't even bother to let us know. Mr Tom's words of gratitude - expressed in his letter - are very touching, they made me glad I do this job. They also left me with a bitter taste of the injustice which had gone on here. It's debatable whether Mr Tom would have gone to prison, the judge was considering alternatives such as a community service at the time of sentencing, but he felt the 'amount' warranted an immediate custodial sentence. This wasn't just fraud by a person who confessed to his crime, it was government inefficiency, it was also our work as dedicated and professional specialists which got the amount reduced. We did so because we know the law concerning social security, we are proper specialists Mr Clarke. We are dedicated and committed and know our subject - this isn't work which can be undertaken by anyone Mr Clarke, our work is important to justice and preservation of liberty. Oh how I'd love to show Mr Clarke the work we do, I just don't know how he can contend we just dish out 'basic mechanical advice' - it's a view which simply astounds me; today it angered me. And I don't suppose the DWP will ask the press to re-print the headlines and say sorry for their mistake, I don't suppose that would make good headlines at all- such headlines would be of no interest to anyone other than those involved with this long old battle. Oh and by the way Mr Clarke, we haven't been paid a penny for our work yet - that will only happen now I can mark Mr Tom's case 'closed'. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=136#ixzz1NgZ6xXLz
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:38:59 GMT 1
Benefit,debt and housing « Thread Started on Jan 31, 2011, 2:48pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A typical case study involved a client who was faced with being evicted from his home due to mortgage arrears of £17,450.00 The welfare adviser managed to establish that the client had an entitlement of £770 per month towards his mortgage and assisted the client to make a backdated claim with the result that an award of £3,400 was paid off his arrears. The housing adviser represented the client at court and this resulted in the eviction being cancelled. The debt adviser assisted the client to deal with a county court judgement for £22,000 and arrangements were made for this debt to be repaid at the rate of £5 per month. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=135#ixzz1NgZLwh30
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:41:57 GMT 1
Mr & Mrs G: housing and benefit problems « Thread Started on Jan 31, 2011, 1:14pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is sad to say that if the legal aid reform proposals come into force in their current form, it is highly unlikely that anyone in the position of the couple below will be able to get the professional help they need to sort problems like these out Mr and Mrs G, both have learning and other disabilities They contacted Gloucester Law Centre because they could not understand why they were having to pay so much rent when their income was very low, causing them severe financial hardship A legal advisor at the Law Centre discovered that their landlord, a housing association, had misunderstood information received from the housing benefit section and had credited too little rent to their account, and was then asking them to pay additional rent We sorted this out for them so that their rent account went into credit. We also checked their benefit entitlement and discovered that Mr G’s incapacity benefit had not been paid to him for over a year because of an “oversight” by the DWP Mr G, who is blind, received several thousand pounds in arrears, but without our help this may never have been picked up. Mr and Mrs G had a Social Services support worker but she had not picked up either problem. She explained that she had telephoned the DWP to query the couple’s benefit income but after being assured that all was in order she took no further action « Last Edit: Jan 31, 2011, 1:18pm by Patrick » Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=134#ixzz1Nga6Ljgb
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:42:58 GMT 1
Ms G: caught between two bureaucratic giants « Thread Started on Jan 28, 2011, 1:26pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a recent case kindly provided by Gloucester Law Centre. It demonstrates the kind of legal work that would no longer be able to be carried out by the Centre, and other legal aid providers, should the legal aid reform proposals go ahead as planned. The reform proposals say that clients would be able to deal with this kind of thing themselves - that legal advice is simply not necessary for problems with benefits - that this kind of advice is "mechanical" Names have been anonymised -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms G was referred to the Law Centre by a Tribunal Judge for advice on a complicated housing benefit matter. The client and partner purchased a property whilst both working, although they could not obtain a mortgage so the client’s parents re-mortgaged their own home and purchased a property for them with the mortgage advance. As Ms G’s parents are retired and could not afford the mortgage repayments the parties entered into a trust deed providing that the client and partner could occupy the property provided they met the monthly repayments on the remortgage. Unfortunately the Client and partner subsequently became unemployed and claimed Jobseekers Allowance. They attempted to claim help with their housing costs either through housing benefit (HB) or DWP housing costs. However the claim for housing benefit was refused by the local authority, whilst the DWP refused to even accept a claim for help with housing costs. Ms G appealed the HB decision and at the Tribunal hearing the Judge adjourned the case and referred the client to the Law Centre for assistance, requesting a submission on the application of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996. We helped Ms G to pursue both the HB appeal and also a DWP claim in the alternative. The Judge has reserved the HB decision which is still awaited but, in the meantime, the DWP have accepted our submission, quoting Upper Tribunal authority, that the payments can be met by them, and our clients have received £6000 in arrears payments and ongoing payments and will not now have to sell the house. As they have a young child they would, if forced to sell, have applied to the local authority for homeless assistance as an unintentionally homeless family in priority need and been eligible for assistance. Our intervention therefore saved considerable amounts of public money for a very modest cost. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=131#ixzz1NgaNZXPz
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:44:19 GMT 1
Inappropriately detained, with Asperger Syndrome « Thread Started on Jan 27, 2011, 4:43pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have a story, though I realise I have already missed the 12 pm deadline. Also this is not my story but my son's so I have to find a way of giving you an outline with in no way identifying him. Basically he has a very late diagnosis of Asperger Syndrome (early twenties). For this reason, he is a very private person and therefore would not I am sure be willing for any direct publicity or to be involved in an interview. Nonetheless his case illustrates so exactly what can happen to someone and how they can be totally inappropriately detained, at huge personal costs to themselves and to the public purse. Briefly having never shown any aggressive behaviour in his life, being conflict avoidant, gentle personality etc. he was involved in a very difficult personal family situation which he could not handle in the way that a neurotypical might have done. The person in question pursued him through the legal system. On a not guilty plea, after months out on bail, the case got to the Crown Court but by then he was in breakdown. He failed to turn up to the hearing, and despite medical evidence of his state the judge refused bail and had him arrested. There was no social worker to speak for him. He ended up in a severely catatonic state and on remand in prison. Several months and many hearings later (from which he was excused because of risk of further catatonia) he was transferred to a low secure unit. It took us a further 9 months to get him out of there. It was a totally inappropriate placement for someone with no previous or ongoing record of aggressive behaviour, conflict avoidant in the extreme. The placement caused immense trauma, even more than the months in prison. In the period between the incident which was the start of all this, and the imprisonment, there was no care or support in place whatsoever despite his own attempts at getting social services support, and a referral on the mental health side. In fact he was in prison for several months before even having a named social worker. « Last Edit: Jan 27, 2011, 11:22pm by Patrick » Report to Mod - Link to Post - Back to Top Logged Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=128#ixzz1Ngai0Qh9
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:45:42 GMT 1
63 lives. One chance to change them. « Thread Started on Jan 20, 2011, 2:13pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 63 lives. One chance to change them. A snapshot of an ordinary day at Bolton Citizens Advice Bureau. This piece can also be downloaded - see link at end [edit 26.01.11: link has now been updated] Below is the list of enquiries made by all the new clients who walked off the street and in through the door of Bolton CAB on January the 11th, 2011. The Social Welfare Law Drop-In (SWDI) was open that day from 9:30 am -3.30 pm. Everyone below received advice from a specialist in the relevant area(s) of law. Another 31 people came into the bureau that day. They have not been included here. Some needed signposting elsewhere, whilst the majority were attending follow-up appointments with specialist advisers and solicitors. This was an average day. It is not unusual for Bolton CAB’s open door drop-in to deal with a much greater number of enquiries than this. This list does not include the numerous contacts from other clients, in person or by telephone, in respect of ongoing cases that the Bureau is progressing under legal aid or other funding. Nor does this list include the details of any home visits, telephone advice lines, outreach work or other advice surgeries that Bolton CAB provides. We don’t expect you to read every single entry but we hope, that by at least browsing some, it will give you an idea of the kinds of problems people face today and the work we believe we should protect. The final, and most significant point that needs to be made is that if the current proposals to reform legal aid (especially the removal of whole categories of law, such as Welfare Benefits and Employment from public funding) were implemented and, if Bolton CAB’s Financial Inclusion Fund income is withdrawn, it estimates that it would only have been able to deal with about 5 or 6 of the 63 people who walked through the front door on January the 11th, 2011. 1) 60-year old had a letter from Department for Work & Pensions questioning his entitlement to claim Disability Living Allowance. He needs help protecting entitlement. 2) Family with 2 children under the age of 4. They’ve not received any benefits for several weeks, and have no money to live on. They are also being chased by high street banks for taking out credit to try keep on top of the bills. They haven’t been able to feed themselves properly for some time. 3) Water company threatening lone parent of 3 young children with court action. The family are struggling to make ends meet on one low wage. 4) 24-year old father with 2 young children has been refused paternity leave by employer after his partner suffered a stillbirth. He has no one to look after his children, as partner is currently unable to do so due to pregnancy related health problems. Employer says will sack him if he tries to take any time off. The Department for Work & Pensions has also incorrectly dealt with his families claim for in-work benefits. 5) 25-year old woman being unlawfully pursued for £11k. Is worried about her inability to get mortgage in future when wants to start family. 6) Father, low paid, with family of 4 school-aged children has started having deductions of £500 pcm taken from his wages by the Child Support Agency. He does not understand why they are taking so much money from his wages and cannot afford to feed his other children. He is unable to pay his bills and is getting deeper into debt. 7) 32 yr old woman currently training to become a teacher is in danger of not being able to finish her university course due to substantial debts. 8) 20 yr old expectant mother (21 weeks pregnant) and her partner are struggling to pay their rent, bills and food from his wage of £500 per month. They are very concerned about the baby’s health. Is there anything else they can claim or do? 9) Disabled mother of 6 children needs advice and assistance in relation to what benefits can be claimed. 10) 25-year old lone parent of a young baby has no income whatsoever and is relying on handouts from friends who cannot support her any longer. She is suffering from depression and does not know what to do. 11) 30-year old man is currently living and working in the UK. He is engaged to a British woman but is facing deportation. He wants to know if he has any rights. 12) 53-year old disabled man and father of 3 has had his Income Support revoked and wants to see if a challenge is appropriate (youngest aged 3). 13) 30-year old man whose employer unreasonably refused to pay his holiday pay. Has now left him in problems with debts. 14) 39-year old working woman wants to bring her sick auntie to UK so she can look after her wants to know how to go about this and whether or not she will be able to continue to work if she does. 15) Recently widowed 53-year old disabled woman being pursued by Department for Work & Pensions for a £6k overpayment. She has other debts and is being threatened with eviction. 16) Lone parent with two small children under the age of 2 has problems proving her identity and her right to work and has found that no one will employ her because of this. 17) Lone parent with 3 young children is being paid a total of £47.50 per week in benefits. Has been struggling to survive on this amount. Her home now under threat as a result. 18) Young married couple accidentally filled wrong visa forms out for Dutch national to stay in the country. They are now facing separation by UK authorities. 19) 44-year old mother of 2 young children is being pursued for debts that have had excessive fees added. The debts occurred as a result of her failed business. 20) 52-year old lone parent of 1 child has received a Home Office letter stating that she has to leave the country; she is unable to speak or read English. 21) Lone Father with child aged 2 is working, but for low pay. He has been topping up his earnings by taking out loans. He has been struggling to pay these back and is now facing bankruptcy. 22) A 34-year old care assistant who considered trying a course to improve her job prospects has now had court papers served for course fees even though never formally applied or started. 23) Young male job seeker has been ordered by the Department of Work and Pensions that he is only allowed 24 hours off his job seeking in order to go to his Brothers funeral. His brother died abroad. If he attends his brother’s funeral, his Job Seekers Allowance and Housing Benefit & Council Tax benefits will cease. He is already in court on Monday for rent arrears, is worried that by going to funeral he will lose his home. 24) Woman, having lost £100k in a failed business, has had her claim for Housing Benefits refused and home is at risk. 25) Mother of 3, recently separated and trying to set up a new home, put in a claim for benefits in November and has still not had her claim processed. She is struggling to support her children and doesn’t know who to turn to for help. 26) British citizen returning from Denmark having various problems, including with housing and benefits as she seeks to re establish herself in the UK. 27) Mother with 5 children under the age of 10. Recently separated from her abusive partner. Has a number of debts and is being harassed by creditors. One firm of bailiffs are using illegal and particularly aggressive tactics. 28) Young man who got involved with ‘loan sharks’ when was made to leave home aged 17. Has now reconciled with parents and moved back home. Is now facing excessive and unlawful charges for loans taken out which he is trying to pay. 29) Male lone parent with 18-month child has received no benefits in relation to the child. Told by Department for Work & Pensions that he has to wait another 4 weeks for any benefit because the child’s absent mother hasn’t responded to correspondence. Is struggling to feed and clothe his child. 30) 38-year old woman with 4-months old baby is being pursued (apparently unlawfully) by the Housing Benefit Department for an alleged overpayment dating back to 2003. 31) Young married couple with 2 pre-school aged children denied benefits for the children that they are legally entitled to. The couple, who both work in low paid jobs, are struggling to buy food for the household. 32) Disabled woman, recently widowed, having problems sorting out benefits for her and her 3 children. 33) Woman received letter from the Department for Work & Pensions notifying her that her benefit entitlement will be cut by almost a third (£20 per week) due to alleged overpayment from over 10 years ago. Needs help challenging this as she was not in receipt of any benefits at the time and was not even in the country at the time the overpayment had occurred. 34) 53-year old father with one child (age 11) has had his disability benefits revoked and needs to appeal against the decision. 35) Working mother of three young children needs help as she is being taken to court by the Department for Work & Pensions, who are seeking to recover Carers Allowance that she received for looking after her disabled child. 36) 56-year old man unable to work. Has been told by Department for Work & Pensions that he is now fit for work. 37) 47-year old man has arthritis in all joints that is getting worse and is now extremely painful. Under care of hospital. Is being cared for by his wife. Has received a letter saying his disability benefits are to be taken away. 38) 20-year old single mum of a pre-school age child. Has recently separated from her partner. Needs advice on benefits she’s entitled to in order top-up her low wage so that she can provide properly for her child. 39) 40-year old married woman bullied out of her job and now unable to work due to sickness. Husband is disabled. Needs help with challenging the employer and advice in relation to maintaining rented property and benefit entitlement. 40) 44-year old mother of 4 children, the youngest of who is 8-years old, has had all benefits revoked for reasons the client can’t understand. Is unable to work and is worried about how to feed her children. Needs help challenging the decision of the Department of Work & Pensions. 41) 48-year old diabetes and asthma sufferer has had to cease working because he passes out 2-3 times a day. He is a father of 3 young children. Is having problems with benefits as Department of Work and Pensions are not paying him the correct money. This is also having a negative impact on his health. 42) 23-year old woman is being admitted into hospital for heart surgery. She is having problems understanding what benefits she will be able to claim, as she will be unable to work for some time after her operation. 43) Disabled client aged 19 has had his fitness for work called into question by the Department of Work & Pensions. His benefit entitlement has stopped and as a result faces eviction from his home. 44) 52-year old father with one child (aged 11) is having problems with his disability and carers benefits. 45) Client is a married mother with two small children (aged 2 and 1). Has had her asylum claim refused and has no money to live off whatsoever. No food and nowhere for her or her children to sleep. 46) 26-year old man is working, but only earning £25 per week. Lives with elderly parents. Household is on the verge of serious debt. He wants to know if it is it legal to only pay him this much and how can he manage his debts. 47) A 32-year old EEA family permit holder is under threat of being expelled from the UK but believes he has rights to reside in the country. 48) 42-year old mother has substantial debts and is being harassed by creditors who are using aggressive tactics to pursue her. 49) 30-year old man wants to look at the possibility of a Judicial Review of the UK Border Agency decision to refuse his stay in the UK. 50) 64-year old man, recently widowed is being pursued by creditors and is struggling to meet basic living costs. This is making him depressed. Is there anything that anyone can do to help. 51) A 43-year old woman has been short changed by her employer over her holiday and sick pay. She wants to know what if she has any rights and how she can get this money back. 52) A 37-year old woman on low pay has a dispute over unpaid holiday pay and has been refused a written contract by employer. 53) 52-year old mother with two children (age 14 and 5) has a problem with daughter’s immigration status, which could lead to the family being split. 54) 59-year old woman is being made redundant at work and feels it’s unfair. Is also confused about the relationship between occupational pensions and benefits. Needs help on her rights. 55) 42-year old man appears to have been unlawfully refused arrears of benefit he was entitled to. 56) 90-year old woman needs help with the complexities of the benefit system and advice and assistance in claiming the correct benefits for her and carer. 57) 56-year old disabled woman, recently divorced, has had her Income Support withdrawn for reasons she can’t understand. Doesn’t know if challenging this decision is appropriate. 58) 60-year old disabled man has had his disability benefits withdrawn despite his worsening condition. Seeks help with appeal. 59) 40-year old woman with a council tax court summons. Problem has occurred because of a misunderstanding about her 21-year old daughter’s college course details, which meant that her benefits also stopped as a result – urgent action needed to prevent bailiffs. 60) 45-year old self employed woman whose house is at risk of being repossessed because her business is failing. Doesn’t know what to do. 61) 39-year old father with 2 children (ages 9 and 6). Lost his job just before Christmas. Wife is very ill with intestinal failure, is also being pursued for secure loan that was used to convert the loft to ensure has enough space in the house for the children. Needs Employment advice re dismissal, debts, benefits and risk to house through arrears on secured loan. 62) Bailiffs are pursuing client for alleged monies that are owed. Client can’t afford to pay. 63) 19-year old father with 1 child (6 months) wanting to know about the effects of going back to college on his benefits/housing situation. Wants to improve himself and to try for a better life for his family. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Download this piece as a PDF file here Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=98#ixzz1Ngb4l8xU
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:47:15 GMT 1
How it all came 'good' with Legal Aid! « Thread Started on Jan 10, 2011, 1:30pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here's another account of what the Government proposals call the 'basic mechanical advice' we provided under the Legal Aid scheme: Mr and Mrs Good (an anonymous name which seems apt) came to see us over a refusal by the Local Authority to pay them Housing and Council Tax Benefit. Mr Good was able to claim some Disability Living Allowance for the severe problems he faced with his declining and well documented ill health. Mr Good had retired on early ill health grounds after working hard all of his life, he and his wife lived off Mrs Good's modest earnings and received some Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit. Mr Good looked all set to be able to take a break and enjoy retirement, albeit constrained by ill health. This seemed only right after paying National Insurance contributions all his life; no one would begrudge them that, would they? Well, all was well until Mr Good decided to draw his occupational retirement pension. He had the option of receiving either a lump sum or periodic payments. The only reason Mr Good had decided to claim his occupational pension (which he was able to do under the plan) was because one of his adult children had explained that they were in severe financial crisis and badly needed to pay off a substantial debt. The family member was in a bad way, stressed and being continually hounded by debt collectors. Mr and Mrs Good had known something was up for some time but there had been a reluctance on the part of the family member to say what the problem was. The parents, as most parents would, decided they would help one of their family. It was a genuine act of coming to the aid of a family member who was in a real crisis, not uncommon in this day and age. I couldn't help but wonder how many other parents may have done the same thing? Mr and Mrs Good correctly reported all of this to the Local Council who initially said all would be well; however, then came the bombshell. The Council took then took the view that giving the money away was an 'intentional deprivation of capital' and, as a result, their Housing and Council Tax Benefit was withdrawn. This is where the deprivation rules become complicated and assume a claimant still has capital if they cannot satisfactorily explain why they disposed of the capital. The effect of the decision was that Mr and Mrs Good had now become Mr and Mrs 'Not-so-Good'. Following the removal of the benefits (which they would have been otherwise entitled to) they were now unable to afford their rent and both rent and Council Tax arrears were accruing. Mr and Mrs Good felt aggrieved at the decision as they believed it was punishing them for doing a good deed for one of their family. They tried to appeal, but the Council held with their decision. The Council did however, suggest that Mr and Mrs Good came to see us for some specialist help. We saw Mr and Mrs Good and took a full history. On the facts, we were able to ascertain that Mr and Mrs Good had an reasonable case. The grounds of appeal were that the regulations say that capital should only be treated under the 'deprivation' rules if it is intentionally disposed of in order to claim or improve a person's position on claiming benefits. We argued that the intention behind the deprivation was what was most relevant, the argument was assisted by the fact that Mr Good had no other reason to take his pension settlement early. He could also have taken it in periodic payments which would have had far less impact on his entitlement. Mr Good's intention in disposing of the capital was (a) to help a close family member and (b) not to take advantage of the Housing Benefit rules. We found several case law precedents which supported our case. There followed quite a few exchanges of letters with the Council who queried various elements of the case - we answered each and every one of these. We consistently argued the intention point behind the relevant rule. We drafted a submission with supporting evidence over the family member's debt and a statement saying how they'd 'asked mum and dad for some help'. In the end the Council, to their credit, agreed with us and allowed Mr and Mrs Good their entitlement, also enabling them to clear their rent and Council Tax arrears as benefit was re-awarded on a retrospective basis. The need for an expensive Tribunal hearing was averted, although we would have been quite prepared to argue this one all the way. The Council agreed with us on the 'intention behind the disposal' aspect of our argument, the law was on the side of Mr and Mrs Good. Mr and Mrs Good were naturally very pleased with the outcome and told us so in a very praiseworthy 'thank you' card. They were on the point of giving up before coming to see us, they had actually indicated they wanted to withdraw their appeal as they couldn't see how they could contest the decision. We praise the Council here, because they encouraged them to seek independent specialist. We did resolve this case but, it was only by possessing specialist knowledge of the regulations and by using case law which won the day. Outcome: Mr and Mrs Good stay in their home and avoid eventual eviction by the Council. They also avoided bailiff action for Council tax arrears and other court action for knock-on problems with other financial commitments. In addition, our help also helped save the family member from the feelings of guilt they had about 'getting mum and dad in so much trouble'. It was a good outcome, we felt justifiably pleased over being able to bring this to a satisfactory conclusion. Basic 'mechanical advice'? you must be absolutely kidding! Cost to the public purse: a fixed fee of £167 + VAT -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you want to reply to this post please register first. It is entirely free to register and should take about 20 seconds « Last Edit: Jan 11, 2011, 10:02pm by Patrick » Report to Mod - Link to Post - Back to Top Logged -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please show some support for MyLegal by registering. It's free and takes about 20 seconds Click here to email the MyLegal Team Patrick Administrator member is offline Joined: Nov 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 134 Re: How it all came 'good' with Legal Aid! « Reply #1 on Jan 11, 2011, 2:28pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Interesting case Nick I think it's worth stressing this point about how the early intervention of a legal aid professional actually saves so much more money further on down the road, both for the public purse and for the local authority If these clients had not received the help you were able to provide, then it is quite likely they would have slowly spiralled down into an even more dire and depressingly difficult situation. Not being able to pay their rent on an ongoing basis would eventually have led to repossession action by the Council. Nor would the Council have been lazy about pursuing the council tax arrears, probably via private bailiffs either All of these things would have led to further actions, proceedings and, ultimately, assuming they sought help, then further and much greater cost to the public purse It's plain madness, I think, that the current proposals try to portray the in-depth knowledge of the law used here as something that is just basic and mechanical I know we keep saying this but, who would Mr and Mrs Good have gone to see if you, as a specialist legal adviser, had not been there to be help them? The current proposals will mean your job won't exist Nick if they go through as they are now - all welfare benefits legal advice and assistance to be removed from scope of public funding « Last Edit: Jan 11, 2011, 2:30pm by Patrick » Report to Mod - Link to Post - Back to Top Logged -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please show some support for MyLegal by registering. It's free and takes about 20 seconds Click here to email the MyLegal Team dpcs New Member member is offline Joined: Jan 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 3 Re: How it all came 'good' with Legal Aid! « Reply #2 on Jan 17, 2011, 11:51pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But the 'Goods' are merely Proles or if too embarrassing unpersons. To protect us from Plutocracy DC will ordain Winston Smith to rewrite the 1949 agenda. Big (Brother) Society will be unleased with weekly X Factor shows to see which lucky DWP applicant (Prole) will win a pension. The necessary outer Party will be retained to protect and serve the Inner Party. There's no room for (Prole) Justice in this oligarchy. I seem to have read about this somewhere ..... Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=84#ixzz1NgbRr1IO
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:48:22 GMT 1
80-year olds fighting the system - why? « Thread Started on Dec 20, 2010, 4:31pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My mother applied for Pensions Credit some years ago. After many months of discussion and revision of the amount she was supposed to be entitled to, we took it to Citizens Advice who used their expertise to review her case. By this means, we discovered that she was entitled to substantially more. How could a lady in her 80's fight such a case without her family and the help of Citizens Advice? I understand that this service offered by CAB might well be lost as a consequence of changes to civil legal aid. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=83#ixzz1Ngbjec8K
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:49:20 GMT 1
"Basic mechanical advice"? Absolute nonsence...! « Thread Started on Jan 7, 2011, 10:50am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mrs M came to see us on the recommendation of the Tribunals Service, she had been trying to contest an Income Support overpayment appeal against a case for recovery of nearly £15,000. The Tribunal realised that Mrs M needed help, so they adjourned the hearing and advised her to seek advice from a Legal Aid specialist, they gave her our name. We saw Mrs M and took full details. We looked at the considerable amount of documentation involved with the case. The grounds for recovery were made on the basis that Mrs M had failed to declare a beneficial interest in a trust which her severely disabled daughters had acquired; this being entrusted to them following the death of their late father. They could not and indeed did not access the trust until the age of 18. The Trust was tied up in a property and some residual proceeds to which Mrs M had no access. We argued that the DWP rules on the need to disclose were far from clear, we went on to say the trust was immensely complicated with its inherent access problems and in any event there was Departmental error in so far as the DWP should have moved Mrs M's claims for her children from Income Support over to Child Tax Credit. The Child Tax Credit rules would have meant that the beneficial interest would have made no difference to what they were entitled to, in summary it was a technical overpayment which existed only on paper. We looked at the review forms carefully and noted that Mrs M had answered the questions correctly, there was no particular question which made it clear what the reporting requirement was. The DWP relied upon the letter of the law as far as the effect capital would have in a trust held for the children, if it exceeded £2500 (it was later increased to £3000) the children were not entitled any dependant's allowance in Mrs M's claim. We argued against this and highlighted the problems with the DWP's review forms and instructional leaflets. We were convinced we had a good case. We went to a First Tier Tribunal with detailed submissions. We attended the hearing on a pro-bono basis but claimed for preparing the papers. The Tribunal did not accept our argument and said that Mrs M was under a generalised duty to report the change in circumstances. We disagreed and argued that where the reporting requirement was not clear, the Tribunal must consider what it was reasonable to expect Mrs M to have known to have declared. We pressed the point that the reasonable rule applied under the provisions of the claims and payments regulations. Mrs M lost the appeal, we strongly disagreed with the Tribunal's decision. We subsequently appealed to the Upper Tribunal and leave to appeal was given. The Secretary of State fully supported our appeal and agreed that the First Tier Tribunal was wrong to fail to pick up our argument on the reasonable test provided for in the regulations, the Secretary of State readily conceded that the forms and leaflets were very unclear and had to be subsequently altered at a later date. The Upper Tribunal allowed our appeal on the grounds made by us and readily accepted by the Secretary of State. We obtained a very good ruling for Mrs M in the Upper Tribunal and are very pleased with the judgement. The case still has to go back to another First Tier Tribunal (this is quite common) which has been issued with full directions by the Upper Tribunal on how the case should be determined. As this part of the case is ongoing we can say no more, we are however confident that the outcome will be a much better one because we can use argument which the previous Tribunal erroneously ruled to be irrelevant. This case illustrates how Legal Aid is absolutely vital to people like Mrs M, there is no way on this earth that Mrs M could have got through this; it was totally beyond her comprehension. I should add that Mrs M had visited other non-specialist agencies who had all told her the case was beyond their level of expertise. I wonder just how much this case has cost the DWP, many thousands of pounds I would say. These are the just some of the cases we argue day in day out on behalf of our client's, this is Legal Aid Mr Clarke, this is not "basic mechanical advice", as Mr Clarke puts it, which could be given in another way. A perverse aspect to this case is over how the whole situation could have been avoided if only the DWP had (1) Made the rules, their forms and leaflets clearer, and (2) Did what Parliament intended and transferred Mrs M's child related claim from Income Support over to Child Tax Credit as per their promise to do so on a 'case by case' basis. Had they done so, this case would never have arisen, the DWP must accept some blame for their failure and for neglecting to protect their own purse. « Last Edit: Jan 9, 2011, 8:57pm by Patrick » Report to Mod - Link to Post - Back to Top Logged -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please show some support for MyLegal by registering. It's free and takes about 20 seconds Click here to email the MyLegal Team Patrick Administrator member is offline Joined: Nov 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 134 Re: I fought officialdom and I'm not sure if I've « Reply #1 on Jan 7, 2011, 11:01am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It's also fair to mention that given the rules on how legal aid providers (solicitors and not-for-profit organisations) get paid for cases, all the work on this matter would have to be classed as one case. The current system is that each case is paid, on closure, at a fixed fee rate of £167. It doesn't matter how long they take or how much work is involved Notably, one of the current reform proposals is that all such fees are reduced by 10%. Well, that's for the categories of law that will be left - this was a welfare benefits matter and the Government proposes to remove welfare benefits from the scope of public funding entirely. In future, should the proposals go through as planned, there will be no legal aid funded specialist help for clients like Mrs M; they'll just have to take their chances Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=76#ixzz1NgbxWqp1
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:50:27 GMT 1
Mrs W: bereaved and benefit 'fraud' « Thread Started on Jan 7, 2011, 1:53am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mrs W came to see us shortly after her mother had sadly died unexpectedly last Easter, her mother had suffered a stroke and passed away in hospital after just over a week. Mrs W was understandably overwhelmed with grief, she came to see us clutching a letter saying her Council Tax Benefit had been suspended because she had not completed and returned a change of circumstances form to the Local Authority, the letters were unpleasant and greatly upsetting to Mrs W, especially when they came so shortly after having to arrange a funeral for her late mother. Mrs W was completely unable to deal with the correspondence, including the review form because they came to her whilst she was dealing with her mother's admission to hospital and then the affairs associated with her loss. We sympathetically went through all the paperwork with Mrs W and realised that an overpayment had arisen because Mrs W had continued to receive payments of the child addition in her Income Support for her son, despite child benefits stopping a few years beforehand when he had left school and took up a work based apprenticeship. We sensitively explained that the overpayment would be considerable and made a disclosure to the Local Council who, to their credit, treated the case most sympathetically. The issue concerning the Council Tax Benefit was resolved with our assistance, this came as a great relief to Mrs W at a time of great distress. A similar disclosure was made to the DWP but their treatment was far less sympathetic. They wrote a demanding letter asking for the return of almost £10,000. Mrs W was immensely shocked by this and we encouraged her to appeal. An appeal was made against the overpayment because the DWP were aware of the position regarding Mrs W's son, she had visited the JobCentre on work focussed interviews, since claiming Income Support whilst looking after her elderly grandmother as a carer. The Jobcentre had not realised that a work based apprenticeship meant the son was treated as a non-dependant; they would also have had access to details of the child benefit cessation on their system; whilst apparently 'checking Mrs W was receiving the correct amount of money'. On the grounds of official error, we challenged the overpayment, we asked for full details of each visit that Mrs W made to the Jobcentre and details of the review forms which were completed in the presence of a DWP officer. We maintained that the overpayment was non-recoverable as our client had no reason to believe she was being overpaid because her claim had been regularly checked off by an officer of the DWP. The DWP conceded that the overpayment was not recoverable. By raising the right argument we averted the need for a costly appeal hearing. The DWP did not apologise for their mistake but they agreed the overpayment was caused by their error and are not recovering it. Hopefully highlighting cases like this helps the DWP realise where official error exists. It was our intervention which avoided the overpayment remaining undetected. Legal Aid highlights cases where it is official error which results in the State erroneously paying money. In this case we prevented the mistake continuing. In this case we were pleased that we were able to avert a huge problem and to some degree alleviate some of the distress which Mrs W suffered at a time of great personal distress. Can I also say, whilst we were sympathetic and sensitive, we were also efficient. But then again you have to be when all you are paid for a welfare benefits case is the standard fixed fee of £167 What would have happened if Mrs W had not been able to access Legal Help? What will happen to people in similar situations if the Government remove the whole of welfare benefits from the scope of public funding, as it plans to do? « Last Edit: Jan 7, 2011, 10:55am by Patrick » Report to Mod - Link to Post - Back to Top Logged Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=75#ixzz1NgcF0BID
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:51:27 GMT 1
Miss T: gender reassignment or "mild depression"? « Thread Started on Jan 6, 2011, 11:23pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is another account of how a provider made a dramatic difference to a person's life. The story concerns someone we shall call Miss T, some details have been changed to protect confidentiality issues; but Miss T is very happy to tell her story. Miss T was born a genetic male. For much of her life she endured bullying and taunting as she found that she could 'never fit in', she battled through life with an inner most conviction that she belonged to the opposite gender. Prejudice exists in this world of ours; as a consequence Miss T bottled up her feelings for years, she felt unable to say what was wrong, she had an up and down employment history and became severely depressed, at times she became suicidal. She tells us that she came very close to ending her life. After a fair number of years Miss T found she could not go on pretending she belonged to a sex she simply didn't identify with. She avoided commitment with partners because she knew it would be unfair on them. She realised that the only way she would find ever find contentment was to undergo full gender reassignment. This was by no means an easy decision to make, it involved much soul searching and leaving behind a persona which others identified with. Miss T on the other hand realised that she needed to find put herself first and find her true personality. Miss T knew that this would involve living in the female role for a minimum of 2 years before she could be considered for full gender reassignment. Gender reassignment is immensely complicated and involves a great deal of painful surgery and the full approval of gender psychiatric specialists. The first we saw of Miss T was after she had been refused Employment & Support Allowance. She was referred to us as the specialist agency who could help her. This was an immensely complicated appeal; fundamentally Miss T had to prove she could adapt to work in order to successfully transition towards the sex she felt she truly belonged to and yet she did not feel ready to enter the job market without some degree of help . It presented us with a dilemma as to how to best present her case. It was very clear that the healthcare professional who conducted the cursory medical examination had very little experience of gender reassignment, if any. Indeed, it was not even mentioned in the medical reports, the only reference was to 'mild depression'. This was strongly refuted by Miss T. We took a detailed history and obtained supporting medical evidence from the gender clinic. We argued that Employment & Support Allowance determinations should not be made solely on the basis of whether a person is capable of work or not. The Allowance is intended to provide support to those that have a limitation and need support back into the workplace. We argued that it would be totally inappropriate to expose Miss T to a jobseeking requirement where she would get little support to help her find a placement. The Tribunal accepted our argument and allowed the appeal, they were also critical of the medical examination. Miss T was delighted with the result as she knew that she would now get the support she needed. We saw Miss T about a year later; although she presented with the same problem, her circumstances were very different. By now she was fully committed to her gender reassignment, her medical team had accepted her onto the programme. Her appearance was very different, she spoke more softly and was obviously well on her way towards a successful transition, she was taking hormone treatment and was much happier, she had started to 'find herself'. She told us; how for the first time in her life she had felt at one with herself. Miss T had found a voluntary placement where she was very happy as she was working towards her goal, but the DWP decided she was now ready for full time work. This would mean the removal of all the support which was positively helping Miss T. This would have been disastrous for Miss T. We again prepared a second appeal, we used an argument of continuing support based on limitations which the second inexperienced healthcare professional had failed to consider. Miss T went before a second tribunal who agreed with our argument, they granted Miss T a continuance of Employment & Support Allowance. The Tribunal could see the difficulties caused by such a life changing journey and were very sympathetic to her case. They wished Miss T luck with the rest of her gender reassignment. Miss T came back to see us and expressed a great deal of gratitude for how we had taken the time to carefully research her case, she told me that she felt we'd treated her like a human being, like a person rather than just a problem. Miss T told me that she hopes to set up a gender reassignment counselling service for people who are in a similar predicament. She glowed with happiness at the thought of how her life was literally changing, we felt justifiably proud of how our help had assisted someone become happy, what price do you put on that? This was a positive example of how expert knowledge of the legislation could be utilised in advancing an argument which two separate Tribunals accepted. This was work which achieved the right result. I have every confidence in Miss T and am sure she will do well in whatever she chooses to do because she has the determination; she has bravely embarked upon a journey which would simply be unimaginable to the majority of us. In my view, she deserved a bit of support, in my view she positively needed Legal Aid for the legal problems she had. I wonder how things would have turned out for Miss T if we hadn't have been able to help her? « Last Edit: Jan 16, 2011, 3:36pm by nickd » Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=73#ixzz1NgcWhwle
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:52:25 GMT 1
Child abuse, the law & trying to get myself back « Thread Started on Jan 3, 2011, 9:37pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is a case study from an adviser at an organisation specialising in mental health, welfare benefits and the legal problems that arise when both collide. It is about a young woman called Jane (her name has been changed to protect her identity) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jane was referred to us with an ongoing welfare benefits issue. She had previously been employed, but could no longer cope with her job due to her mental health issues. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) were disputing her entitlement to benefit, saying she was fit for work regardless Jane explained to me that she had been abused by her father as a child, and that this was causing her major distress still. She explained that she hated herself, and that she believed that she was worthless. As a knock on effect to this, Jane told me that her anxiety levels felt uncontrollable, and that her sleep patterns were disrupted. She also disclosed that her eating habits were not as they should be, and that she was either not eating at all or was bingeing at times I felt that Jane began to trust me as she opened up about the issues in her childhood that she felt impacted on her current mental health issues The first issue we tackled was the beliefs that Jane had about herself. This involved challenging Jane’s negative beliefs and thoughts about herself. We spent an hour determining the beliefs that Jane had about herself, and looking at where she thought they had come from. We then looked at if there was any evidence to back up these negative thoughts, and then at what positive thoughts she could come up with to replace the negative ones. As this was not going to be resolved within the hour, this exercise was, and has been, repeated in several of the following sessions We then looked at Jane’s anxiety levels. She explained that she felt that she was dying when her anxiety levels rose, and that she couldn’t control this. I took this opportunity to talk through what actually happens to the body physiologically when a panic attack occurs in the hope that this would reduce the fear Jane has when she panics. We then looked at some breathing exercises, including square breathing and elephant breathing. Jane found the square breathing concept easier to follow, and explained she would try and put it into practice when she felt anxious. Jane’s erratic eating habits were another issue that needed tackling Bibliotherapy is a well-used therapeutic intervention, which involves giving the client some literature around their difficulties. I took this opportunity to give Jane the ‘Healthy Eating and Depression Booklet’, and talked through how erratic eating can have an impact on a person’s depression Challenging negative thoughts is an intervention that will continue throughout our sessions, and Jane continues to use the breathing techniques when feeling panicky With regards to very serious issue of the abuse Jane suffered as a child I began the work but felt she needed more specialist and targeted help and support. With Jane's agreement, I completed a referral to [organisation] for the next steps in dealing with these particular issues To this date, Jane has progressed dramatically. Her original PHQ91 score was 24, and GAD72 was 18. This has now reduced to PHQ9 = 17 and GAD7 = 11 Oh yes, our publicly funded case in respect of the welfare benefits that Jane had been denied... Jane won her appeal and her benefits were awarded in full Jane is now attending college to complete a qualification in law and she is doing voluntary work at a local solicitors firm and also with Victim Support. Jane has a long way to go. One day, she hopes she will feel 100% but she says she would be happy with 80. Jane says she has a future now and is taking it one step at a time We received our standard fixed fee from the Legal Services Commission of £167 + VAT for Jane's 'case' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There was never anything unusual about this young woman. Many of us experience some form of mental health problem during our lives. Many of us don't even realise we are experiencing it when it happens - it isn't always contingent upon an event in childhood, for instance. What is crucial is that the help is there when it is most needed and when we are at our most vulnerable -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1PHQ9 is a Patient healthcare Questionnaire that the patient uses as a self assessment tool for mild to moderate mental illness 2GAD7 is General anxiety disorder scoring system to assess the level of mild to moderate mental illness Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=68#ixzz1NgcjXFQT
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:54:08 GMT 1
Homelessness, Legal Aid and me « Thread Started on Dec 22, 2010, 3:56pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My Story I am a 52 year old single male with a history of mental illness first diagnosed in 2007. I benefited from a first-rate education and in a previous life I have had a successful career as a scientist. In September 2009 I found myself newly arrived in a medium sized town in Northern England. I had never set foot in this town before. I had been through an appalling experience. I had been unlawfully evicted from my home five weeks before. I had lived at that address which was my home for nine years previous to the eviction. I was made street homeless by my eviction, and furthermore I was in fear of physical assault were I to remain in the local area. As a result, I then wandered the country aimlessly, “with only the shirt on my back.” I had no money left. I had been illegally separated from all my worldly possessions. I was in mental depression and I was actively contemplating suicide. I had no-one to turn to. Two days after I had arrived in this new town, in desperation, I went to the local Council to see if they could find me somewhere to live. Initially the Council's Housing Officer was sympathetic, but after she had spoken with her manager, she returned and persuaded me that I had brought everything on myself, and I would best leave the Council's offices of my own free will and seek help in some other part of the country, in particular back where I had come from. I had made plain to the Council's Officer that were I to return there I would risk hospitalisation by way of violent assault. On leaving the Council's offices I became suicidal. I should say that I have had a history of suicide attempts beginning in 2007, about which I had informed the Council's Housing Officer. I called into the nearest high-street firm of solicitors, where I asked about getting legal aid. They said they did not do legal aid and they suggested I try another firm in town. In total I was referred in this way through a chain of no less than five firms of solicitors, until in one of them a receptionist suggested I try the local Citizens Advice Bureau. The opening hours of the CAB were limited, and there was a lengthy queue at the reception. However, I did get an appointment to return when I would be seen by someone to assess my status. When I returned and met the triage worker at the CAB's offices, I explained that I had been evicted unlawfully, and I asked what I could do about that. I was at that time entirely ignorant of the law on matters of housing and property. Fortunately, the triage officer identified that I was in fact homeless and she said that there was a specialist Housing Solicitor at the CAB. I was given an appointment to see the Housing Solicitor. When I was seen by the Housing Solicitor, I was told what the homelessness law was, and I was informed that in my case I was owed a duty by the Council to be housed temporarily. I was given a letter to take to the Council, and when I showed the letter to the Council's Housing Officer I was offered accommodation. It had been the Council's intent earlier to trick me into voluntarily walking away. Upon reflection I wonder what would have happened to me had I not discovered the service provided by the CAB. Had I been left street homeless, I think there was a distinct possibility that I would have made another attempt on my life within the next 48hrs. Either I would have succeeded in killing myself or in crippling myself. The only other conceivable option would have been that I would have walked to either Manchester or London (who knows?), and most likely I would have ended up in the gutter. My mental state would have imploded and further suicide attempts would have followed. I think my life would have been destroyed. I do not think it is an exaggeration to say that the life-line thrown to me by CAB has possibly saved my life. I had no-one else to turn to, and I was contemplating ending my life at that point through suicide. Having secured accommodation, albeit temporary, I was able to get access to medical help, and sign-up as a patient with a local GP surgery. Unfortunately my accommodation problems were not ended. The Housing Department of the Council, who had reluctantly agreed to house me on a temporary basis (and who had needed to be reminded by CAB that it was their duty under the law to do so), then set about doing everything possible to wash their hands of me and have me returned to street homelessness (their actual words). They made repeated efforts, many of which were border-line illegal, to end their duty to me and make me homeless again. This affected my mental health adversely. Given my near complete ignorance of the housing legislation, I have little doubt that the Council's Housing Department would have succeeded in un-accommodating me, were it not for the continuing legal help I was receiving from the Housing Solicitor at the CAB. The Housing Department's behaviour throughout was despicable (and included the fabrication of lies about me). A complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman has been made by me, again with support from the CAB, and this complaint is currently being investigated by the Ombudsman. At length I have been able to secure accommodation with the mental health housing charity Carr-Gomm. I am now starting to try and turn my life around. None of this would have been possible without the help I received by way of legal advice and support offered at CAB. Had legal aid been unavailable to me, it is very likely that I would have become another of the nation's suicide statistics. Report to Mod - Link to Post - Back to Top Logged nickd MyLegal Team member is online Joined: Dec 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 311 Re: Homelessness, Legal Aid and me « Reply #1 on Dec 22, 2010, 5:06pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for sharing your story with Mylegal isthisaman; it takes a lot to come forward and be open about some of the difficult times you've been through. These are the real life events which people experience on a daily basis and we know people aren't always their own best advocates. Your story illustrates how people aren't always able to access the advice they need at the first port of call, some people just aren't aware of, or able to access advice lines which point them in the right direction - many get pushed from pillar to post regardless. Legal Aid reform will make already scarce help more difficult to find and less accessible if you do find it, in many cases it will disappear entirely. Your account, isthisaman, illustrates that Legal Aid has a value far more than money; the price on a human life. MyLegal will put your story to good use ithisaman, so thanks for providing it. « Last Edit: Dec 22, 2010, 9:37pm by Patrick » Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=62#ixzz1NgdAvN76
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:55:18 GMT 1
Mrs B's story and the importance of Legal Aid « Thread Started on Dec 22, 2010, 1:34pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From a Welfare Benefits/Debt Specialist Help point supplier. Let me tell you yet another story about how Legal Help assists our clients as they face the full weight of welfare reform. Certain elements of the client’s case are ongoing; this provides an objective opportunity to comment on the case as the outcome is unknown. Mrs B presents at our specialist help point, already having visited a criminal defence solicitor, CAB and also a Financial Inclusion Worker. Mrs B was heavily depressed, having a mental health history and also suffering from reactive depression following the bereavement of her mother, Mrs B had been completely unable to cope with all that she was facing which included an allegation that she had been living together with her ex husband who she still sees on a regular basis; as he takes an active part of their children’s lives. Mrs B had been interviewed under caution very shortly after her mother died. No formal prosecution has been furthered. It was apparent that Mrs B’s case would need to be unravelled to deal with each separate element; people had been put off from getting involved with the complexities, because it just wasn’t clear where to begin. A need to appeal was identified, against a total disallowance decision on Mrs B’s Employment & Support Allowance and Disability Living Allowance. It was also necessary to make late appeals against Income Support, Jobseeker’s Allowance, Housing & Council Tax Benefit overpayment appeals related to the ‘living together’ allegation. These are the kind of cases the media loves; they would have had Mrs B down as a ‘scrounger’, a ‘cheat’, a ‘faker’ and a ‘fraudster’. An appeal was justified against the disallowance on the Disability Living Allowance, submissions were prepared and the Tribunal made an award. Legal Aid cost £167 An appeal was justified against the disallowance on the Employment & Support, submissions were prepared and the Tribunal made an award. Legal Aid cost £167 The overpayment appeals have been conjoined and run to many hundreds of pages, a submission dealing with case management matters, the legalities, requests for directions, witness statements and case law judgments has been submitted running to well over 100 pages; a Tribunal Judge sensibly allocated a two day slot for hearing the case. We represented (not claiming under Legal Help) the hearing and the authorities started to present their case. In the afternoon it was clear that the authorities had overlooked some of the fundamental necessities of bringing a case for recovery of an overpayment. Much as though Mrs B and her supporting witnesses wanted to give their side of the story, it was appropriate to make an application to adjourn on a legal argument over whether the case should be (a) dismissed or (b) the authorities should being given an opportunity to correct the deficiencies. It is our view that the case should be dismissed because the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to correct the deficiencies brought about by the authorities inadequate preparation of the case. The allegations are strongly contested, but as it is ongoing we can say no more. The application to adjourn was accepted and further legal argument will be convened at a later date. As an organisation we are unable to collect any fee until the case is complete, but I just wonder how much all of this has cost the State so far? I wonder how we might not be where we are if the authorities had taken a less targeted approach and spoken informally to Mrs B rather than assume she was all the things the media loves people like her to be. On my way home from the hearing, I asked myself how Mrs B would have coped without specialist help? There is no way on the earth she could possibly have coped, no way on earth. This is the kind of case where Legal Help makes a difference; let’s be sensible and not take it away. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=61#ixzz1NgdUy4nh
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:56:52 GMT 1
Legal advice to Tina was worth its weight in gold « Thread Started on Dec 22, 2010, 12:30pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Many clients are refused benefits but then win their case on appeal. The current rates are somewhere in the region of 80% of appeals being successful. Without the proper support and legal advice throughout this process, many of the people pursuing an appeal would no doubt lose. As well as the personal trauma and difficulties this will inevitably cause for the person appealing and their family, it also means that money that individuals are entitled to and which would otherwise come into the community is lost If you are interested in how much income a Citizens Advice Bureau or Law Centre generates for clients in the community, then just ask one local to you. The figure is usually in the 100's of thousands each year for each agency Here is Tina's story, please read on -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tina (not her real name) was referred for help with an Incapacity Benefit appeal - she had been refused benefit On presenting for her first appointment she explained that she suffered from panic attacks, irritable bowel syndrome and ulcers of the perinea. She had been subjected to domestic violence from her family resulting in low self-esteem and her husband had recently left her She was very distraught and cried uncontrollably throughout our first meeting. We talked through the benefit criteria for incapacity benefit and disability living allowance (DLA) in order to try to establish a relationship At the time of meeting Tina in early 2009 PHQ91 and GAD72 scores were not being used At our second meeting to discuss preparation for the Incapacity Benefit appeal tribunal she again showed surges of panic and sobbing, but this time I was able to talk to her about learning to cope with these attacks and explain that panic is an entirely natural bodily reaction. We talked about lifestyle changes such as a regular programme of exercise or regular practice of deep relaxation using the Mental Health handbook recommended by John Moores University I also gave her information on using positive statements to use during panic attacks eg ‘I can handle these symptoms’ and ‘this feeling isn’t comfortable, but I can accept it’ Next time we met was to discuss DLA and Tina presented the claim form. Talking the criteria through she acknowledged she was not eligible We needed to attend the incapacity benefit appeal tribunal. Whilst awaiting the tribunal members' decision after the appeal hearing in a side room, Tina had a panic attack, hyperventilating badly. The court usher gave her a bag to breathe into whilst I tried to relaxed her with reminding her of controlled abdominal breathing techniques. She could not face the tribunal members to receive the decision. Fortunately, the decision was positive and she won her appeal Tina is now doing her best to try to rebuild her life. She has begun volunteering at a local agency, where she is using her previous skills in customer service, as a receptionist -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In total, this organisation received a fixed fee of £167 + VAT. This was for the work in preparing for the appeal tribunal only - they were unable to claim any additional costs for the representation, which the Government already refuses to fund. Of course, under the current legal aid reform proposals, ALL welfare benefits funding will be withdrawn. The question must be, what will happen to real people like Tina then? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 PHQ9 is a Patient healthcare Questionnaire that the patient uses as a self assessment tool for mild to moderate mental illness 2 GAD7 is General anxiety disorder scoring system to assess the level of mild to moderate mental illness Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=60#ixzz1NgdqjwDZ
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:58:26 GMT 1
Baldrick's Welfare Benefit Beef « Thread Started on Dec 5, 2010, 2:28pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following are Welfare Benefit cases opened under the legal help scheme. It is proposed these will be removed from scope and no help could be offered on such cases if the reforms go ahead. The argument is that other agencies will offer the advice or that clients can represent themselves to tribunal. Some could but many could not. It is very unclear what advice agencies are proposed to fill the gap after the demise of SWL under the proposals. Nothing is specified in the reform. The cases are real but are examples of types of cases rather than lots of similar experiences. This will hopefully show the truth of such help and that many disadvantaged people will be affected by these reforms and that the cost will be greater both to those concerned and to the public purse. These are everyday cases from an ordinary part of Manchester. They are not unique and will be very widely experienced cases across the UK. Mr X Attended a Employment Support Allowance (ESA) medical He suffer from schizophrenia and chronic anxiety He cannot manage his own affairs and someone has power of attorney (POA) for him. He is engaged with mental health services. He is on the highest levels of Disability Living Allowance (DLA), Care Component. He was assessed as having 0 points at the ESA medical and fit for work. There were concerns with this and very serious concerns about the way the medical was conducted. He also had two substantial overpayment of other benefit The POA was not coping at all, and the client could not do anything on these matters himself. It was seriously affecting his health. They approached us for help With our help: 1. Appeals and complaints were lodged on the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) 2. Appeals were lodged on the over payments The ESA appeal was overturned on a medical review of the medical that had been undertaken. The overpayment appeal was successful and the client found not to be at fault in the recover-ability of the overpayment. The second overpayment was reconsidered successfully on the basis of the other overpayment appeal. Would this have occurred post reform? « Last Edit: Dec 5, 2010, 7:21pm by Patrick » Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=35#ixzz1NgeFcXBH
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 22:59:26 GMT 1
Re: Mr X From Manchester « Reply #1 on Dec 5, 2010, 2:39pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr Y Has a none dependent son that suffers from chronic mental health problems and cannot manage himself nor his own affairs. The son had the offer of a new address, but the move involved a technical decision on a small amount of housing benefit that had been claimed. The local authority (LA) decided against the Mr Y. He appealed this decision and won with no help from professional representation. The LA then sought and won leave to appeal to upper tribunal on grounds of clarification of the particular regulation rather than anything else. The Upper Tribunal Judge advised the appellant (Mr Y) to seek professional representation from bodies that operate under SWL legal aidThe Judge wanted detailed responses in a short period on several key legal points. This case could potentially change the interpretation of this regulation, which could adversely effect or actually help similar clients on any ruling. Could Mr Y have done this himself? In the future Mr Y won't have the option, if the reforms go through, even if Upper Tribunals Judges see the value in such representation and ask for it to be provided. There just will not be anyone there to do so. Similarly, this case would be very unlikely to be able to be opened as a housing case under the new proposals. « Last Edit: Dec 5, 2010, 7:27pm by Patrick » Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=35#ixzz1NgeV2aVT
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 23:00:13 GMT 1
Mr C had been found by the police trying to jump from a motorway bridge after a series of bad events including homelessness and others details that cannot be given. Consequently he failed to attend a ESA medical being in no fit state to deal with this and all benefits had been suspended. He l approached us for help desperate. We helped by Appealed the decision to stop ESA Made a fresh claim. The DWP treated the new claim as a CoC and reinstated the ESA claim pending a new medical but also put the appeal for not attending the medical to a tribunal In the time it took to go to appeal the client then failed the ESA medical. Which we also appealed. The appeals about not attending the medical and the failed medical were both successful with our help. Several weeks later after the appeal hearing He was sent for another ESA medical which they also 'failed.' This was also appealed with our help. We then wrote to the tribunal for the written statement of reasons of the previous successful hearing and sent this to the DWP as evidence in the appeal. This was reconsidered by the DWP successfully. Client health has stabilised. Could this case have been managed successfully without professional representation? Would it have even started? They may not have the option of this help if the reforms go through. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=35#ixzz1NgefehTj
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 23:01:13 GMT 1
Mrs C was 64 when her DLA of high rate mobility and middle rate care was up for renewal. The DWP awarded at renewal only High Rate Mobility. She appealed herself and attended the tribunal with no medical evidence. The Tribunal removed her high rate mobility and left her with nothing. She was 65 by the time of the hearing so could not reapply. She came to us for help. We helped by Appealing to the upper tribunal on a point of law. The upper tribunal agreed and sent the case for rehearing to a new tribunal after setting aside the previous appeal decision. The client attended the new hearing with a properly presented appeal and was successful in a reinstated award of high rate mobility that continued after she was 65. This client followed the advice of the reform and presented her own case to the tribunal but found herself in a finacially worse position in what was later found to be a defective decision. However with legal advice this client was able to challenge a defective decision and via a professionally presented case and a new tribunal that they were were entitled to high rate mobility beyond the age of 65. If the reform goes ahead this disabled client would in a much worse position by following the advice of the reform not just now but for the rest of their life. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=35#ixzz1NgeyLq6l
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 23:03:40 GMT 1
Mrs C was 64 when her DLA of high rate mobility and middle rate care was up for renewal. The DWP awarded at renewal only High Rate Mobility. She appealed herself and attended the tribunal with no medical evidence. The Tribunal removed her high rate mobility and left her with nothing. She was 65 by the time of the hearing so could not reapply. She came to us for help. We helped by Appealing to the upper tribunal on a point of law. The upper tribunal agreed and sent the case for rehearing to a new tribunal after setting aside the previous appeal decision. The client attended the new hearing with a properly presented appeal and was successful in a reinstated award of high rate mobility that continued after she was 65. This client followed the advice of the reform and presented her own case to the tribunal but found herself in a finacially worse position in what was later found to be a defective decision. However with legal advice this client was able to challenge a defective decision and via a professionally presented case and a new tribunal that they were were entitled to high rate mobility beyond the age of 65. If the reform goes ahead this disabled client would in a much worse position by following the advice of the reform not just now but for the rest of their life. Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=35#ixzz1NgeyLq6l
|
|
|
Post by nickd on May 28, 2011 23:05:46 GMT 1
Disabled by debt and disability: Mr. P's story « Thread Started on Dec 20, 2010, 10:05am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is Mr. P's story. He was assisted by Advocacy in Wirral (AIW) with both debt and benefits matters funded under legal aid. The case study was written and sent to us by a caseworker at AIW It is important to note that successful welfare benefits appeals, properly establishing a client's entitlement to state benefits, brings money into local communities. This is in addition to having the immediate benefit of alleviating the distress and difficulty the claimant was undergoing. Of equal note, the successful restructuring of his debts then ensured that Mr. P was fully back in control of his finances and was able to lead as normal a life as possible, servicing both his priority and non priority credit commitments to the satisfaction of all his creditors -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. P presented with financial difficulties, with debts amounting to approximately £13,000 He explained he had suffered a stroke, which had subsequently affected both his physical and mental health. As well as the physical affects of the stroke, Mr. P was now suffering from depression and anxiety Whilst discussing his debts, Mr. P talked about the difficulties with going out alone and with caring for himself. So, in the first meeting, there appeared to be 2 issues – debts, and a potential application for Disability Living Allowance (DLA) After talking through the options around dealing with his debts, Mr. P agreed to the process of sending holding letters to his creditors, asking them to put the accounts on hold for 3 months, suspending any interest and charges on the account, and then sending offers of repayment. As Mr. P had also highlighted difficulties with his mobility and care, I explained the eligibility criteria for Disability Living Allowance. With his permission, I requested a DLA application pack for Mr. P, and it was completed in another session and a formal application for the disability benefit was made Further down the line, his creditors accepted our offers of repayment and payment plans were put into place. However, Mr. P was declined DLA. The next step was to appeal this decision, so we completed a GL24, which was submitted to the appeals service I then gained permission from Mr. P to gain further medical evidence from his GP, and from his worker at the stroke association, to which he agreed. Once I had received this, it was forwarded as further medical evidence to back up his appeal. However, the appeal was not a success and so the case went to full tribunal I prepared a submission with Mr. P, which highlighted the difficulties he has on a daily basis with his mobility and with looking after himself, which was then forwarded to the Tribunals Service We attended the tribunal in due course, where Mr. P and I explained in great detail about the difficulties he has on a daily basis, both with his care and mobility needs. His wife also attended, which gave her the chance to explain the help and encouragement she provides for her husband The tribunal was successful, and Mr. P was awarded the high rate mobility and middle rate care components of DLA As one of the difficulties Mr. P faced was getting in and out of the bath, I approached him with the idea of applying for a Disabled Facilities Grant, which would allow him to have a walk-in-shower fitted in his bathroom. This process involved contacting Social Services and arranging an occupational health assessment at Mr. P’s home. Following this assessment, the application forms were then completed. The grant has since been awarded, and we are awaiting a date for the work to take place Mr. P’s 2 files are now closed, as both issues were dealt with successfully. Payments are in place with all creditors, and no interest is being charged. He is now in receipt of DLA, and has a new car through the mobility scheme. He also has his blue badge, and is awaiting adaptations to his property for a walk in shower -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total cost to the public purse - the amount Advocacy in Wirral received for this work - was: £123 for the debt file + £167 for the Welfare Benefits (DLA) matter = £290 + VAT in total The usual fixed fee for a Debt matter is £200, however AIW do not hold a Debt contract so the work was done under 'tolerance', whereby the LSC pays a lower fee, regardless of the amount or quality of the work performed « Last Edit: Dec 30, 2010, 3:37pm by Patrick » Read more: mylegal.org.uk/index.cgi?board=advice&action=display&thread=59#ixzz1NgfvFmju
|
|