There are no winners..
What has become evident since posting “Victory is sweet…” could rightfully be told as opinion splitting.
Relayed as a snapshot it was intended to show that things do and can go wrong. The failings of a system not metered for such an up-scale of numbers. By a quirk of fate if you will, one instant of astute thinking by an unknown person prevailed.
Well it needed that or things would not have turned out as they did.
Primarily when you have a system fit to bust things go wrong. This happened on two fronts, the Department of Work and Pensions and the Clerk of Courts for the Tribunal Service. There being a third party certainly doesn’t help matters.
Ordinarily what happens is that if you need or want evidence/further evidence to be considered at any tribunal, you bundle it up and send it with proof of posting to the appropriate office. You may assume they have also performed the same task for the DWP, the other party in this case.
Bringing us neatly to them. Papers do, have, and will go missing in this leviathan. As it is not uncommon there are strict rules on receiving and keeping them. Nevertheless, it continues and in this case it happened to the client concerned. Not because the rules had changed specifically, but years prior and had never been picked up.
Consequently he had been on the receiving end of constant denials. What should have been sent or kept…wasn’t!
In fact, and in no uncertain terms, the DWP had remarked that as any previous claim now no longer exists, they [sic] are only complying to the new rules and descriptors as they now exist. It seems thereupon, that it validates its previous errors of office administration by wearing a new hat. Pretty darn convenient new rules can cover/hide indiscretions, if this is the case.
It is therefore so important that you – if acting as an aid/advisor/representative – remember basics. As I mentioned previously. Do check with the Clerk at your particular Court, and they should be seeking you/your client out as well. Hand them another copy of your ‘bundle’, it only takes a few moments to double check all the documents are there.
Missing ones could be your saving grace, as it certainly was in mine/ours.
What though singles this case out for me is quite exceptional , and perhaps I shouldn’t remark about this, but I’ve decided to.
I have acted as a ‘Representative’ before in different cases, causes, and other Courts wearing those different hats but I’m certainly not known on any circuit as a regular. There is and has always been a professional relationship everywhere I’ve been – perhaps I’ve been lucky.
Nevertheless before I left the building, and in no uncertain terms, it was imparted to me that my particular case had deeply shocked the Court. And that was from the Usher, Clerk upwards. Told to me from the ‘Upwards’ down. And I think they in turn wanted me to pass the message on.
It was the ‘missing/s’… bit/part which has infuriated them the most considering the content. Sheer disbelief and these guys are not easily shocked, after all you tend to see most of human life stand before you in those positions.
What also is noticeable, is that the evidence provided by the Healthcare Professional was never going to be considered. As it was put, their ‘opinion’ would be discounted.
In some ways that opts out of the so called ‘hate-fest’ betwixt anyone concerned. True the operational methods utilised by *Atos* leave much to be desired by the professionals.
That debate will correctly be continued, as it should. Petitions raised should be heard not dismissed for trivia which seems all too likely. The relevant Ministers concerned will increasingly find it harder to weasel their way out of ever reducing corners. For weasels they are.