Tag: Tribunal

12 the next day she took her five-month-old son in her arms

Posted on
Six months after having her income cut off and housing benefit withdrawn
she was sharing her sister’s one-bedroom flat
destitute
with a baby to care for.
32 years old,
a Frenchwoman
living in Britain
since 1997.
In 2008 she graduated
with a degree in philosophy.
She found she was pregnant.
She looked for work.
The Department told her
the fact that she was within 11 weeks of giving birth
disqualified her;
she was not in a fit condition to work.
She was told to apply for income support.
But she had an eight-month period in 2003
when she had been working in a cafe,
and had no records to prove it;
her claim was turned down.
Appealed;
turned down.
She applied for child benefit;
rejected.
Hackney council demanded she repay
200 pounds in housing benefit
she had been given
just as her Jobseeker’s allowance
was being taken away.
She applied to take the Department to tribunal
but repeatedly failed to be given a date
for the hearing.
She was desperate.
Her last attempt to get a date from the tribunal service
took place on 12 June.
The next day she took her five-month-old son in her arms
and jumped from the flat’s sixth-floor balcony.

[The Guardian, 08/01/2010, Comment: Christelle and her baby died at the hands of a callous state]

34 my patient will be in pain

Posted on
In his report, the first doctor
lists various serious health issues:
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,
cervical spondylosis,
osteoarthritis.
In his summary, the doctor stated:
‘My patient will be in pain
on standing and
at the commencement
of walking. Whilst
on the balance of probability
he would be able to walk
20 metres in my opinion
he could not walk that distance
without pain
or exhaustion.
In terms of cooking
his very limited respiratory tolerance
and his difficulties with lifting means that
anything
other than
straightforward microwave cooking
is likely to be beyond
his capabilities.
It would be reasonable
to describe him
as requiring assistance with toilet needs;
the need to monitor and change his catheter
requires medical input.’
Despite this
the Department
continued to find him fit for work
and blocked him from receiving full benefits.
Three months later
another doctor wrote:
‘I am this patient’s General Medical Practitioner
and the custodian
of the primary medical records
they have accumulated
during their lifetime in the UK.
Following a recent assessment this patient,
in contradiction of my own knowledge over time
clinical assessment and
medical certification,
was found fit for work.
Because of my patient’s health condition
there would be a substantial risk
to his health
if he were found not to have
limited capability
for work related activity.
I disagree
with the outcome of your assessment
and support my patient
in his appeal
against your decision.’
Despite this
the Department continued to deny him
benefits.
His health – as predicted – deteriorated badly.
He developed pneumonia.
His weight dropped to six stone
(38 kilos).
Twelve months later
he left hospital
in an emaciated state
to take on the Department
at a tribunal.
The decision was overturned.
The Department agreed to backpay
four thousand pounds.
That money is now being used
to pay for his funeral.

[Liverpool Echo, 28/04/2019, Revealed: Warnings about dying Stephen Smith that were cruelly ignored by the DWP]

40 a decision was taken

Posted on
His daughter received a text
and immediately knew something was wrong.
The decision was taken
despite being told by his doctor
he was too sick to return to his job.
(He had been a painter and decorator.)
He had suffered from anxiety and depression
for six years. He also had
breathing problems
caused by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
The Department had written to him
a year earlier
requesting a consultation in July.
Four days before the medical
he attended his doctor’s surgery
in a state of panic.
He was declared fit to work.
Following the decision
he lodged an appeal
but it was rejected.
His support was stopped in November.
December. His daughter had been planning
to help him take his case to a tribunal,
but she had had to leave him
to go Christmas shopping
and to pick up her children,
when she received the text.
‘I love you.’
She found him
and performed CPR
before calling an ambulance.
Three days later
a decision was taken
to turn off his life support.

[Inews, 06/06/2019, Chronically ill father died by suicide after DWP declared him fit to work and cut his benefits]

50 you probably won’t have heard

Posted on
You probably won’t have heard much about the case.
A 33-year-old woman in the West Country
living with her parents.
She very poorly:
bipolar disorder;
she has been sectioned on numerous occasions
after harming herself.
In February she received a letter
from the outsourcing company
which told her she was about to lose her support
and would have to undergo an assessment.
She was found by her mother
and taken to hospital.
She’d slashed her throat in the bath.
Her psychiatric nurse
and a forensic psychologist contacted
the company, and told them
not to contact her directly again.
The company agreed.
The morning after she was released from hospital
she returned home
to find another letter.
She was readmitted to hospital
having slashed her throat again.
Her mother contacted a local benefit advice charity.
They managed to restore her benefits
without the need for further tribunals.
Last week,
another letter.
The charity again took up her case.
The company told them the letter
was computer-generated
and could not be stopped.

[New Statesman, 05/03/2013, The tragedy of Alice]

54 the old system

Posted on
During the 1960s
while pregnant with her
her mother took thalidomide.
She is blind in one eye,
partially deaf,
can barely walk,
barely dress herself.
She has arthritis.
In 2004 she underwent surgery
to remove a brain tumour.
She retired from her job
as a care assistant.
She was to undergo spinal surgery
late in 2013.
‘It is because of the way I have had
to manipulate my body over the years
to try and live a normal life.
Because we have to use our bodies
in different ways
what anyone else finds normal
has killed us.’
She and her late husband
were believed to be
the first thalidomide victims in Britain
to get married.
(Her carer
helps her make tea
and brushes her hair.)
In July 2012
she received a letter
saying she must go
on a training course.
Her family appealed
and the decision was overturned.
Then
in October
she was told
once again
she should not
be claiming benefits
as she could not prove
she was unfit to work.
A further appeal was rejected.
A spokesman for the Department said
‘The old system
condemned too many people
to a life on benefits
with little hope
of moving back to work.
Now
people who can work
will be given help
to find a job
while those who need unconditional support
will get it.’
She was served with court papers
and must attend a tribunal
where she will have to prove
her disabilities to a judge.

[Daily Star, 16/03/2013, Benefits hell for Thalidomide patient; Daily Mail, 15/03/2013, Blind in one eye, partially deaf and facing major spinal surgery but Thalidomide mother is still found fit to work; The Independent, 15/03/2013, Capable of ‘work-related activity’: Partially blind Thalidomide victim with brain tumour fights Atos decision to force her to attend interviews and put together CV]