Caselaw summaries

Amendments made by the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) (Amendment) Regulations 2017 (SI No.194) regarding Activity 3 (Managing therapy or monitoring a health condition), in an attempt to reverse effect of the decision of the Upper Tribunal in SSWP v LB (PIP) [2016] UKUT 0530 (AAC) – not unlawful

Mobility component after pension age – inability to start getting mobility component after pension age

Tribunals – tribunal erred in failing properly to consider claimant’s request for a face-to-face hearing rather than by telephone

Tribunals – claimant appealed regarding personal independence payment and while appeal was pending made a second claim - withdrew the second claim but DWP ignored that and made a decision in the second claim

Personal independence payment - (PIP) - alcohol use disorder – assessment in PIP cases

Claimant with autism – tribunal failed to explain (regarding mobility Activity 1) why it rejected evidence of the claimant suffering severe anxiety (and so ‘overwhelming psychological distress’) when on a journey

Tribunals – responsibility to explain a decision apparently inconsistent with previous award

Tribunals – previous tribunal found that claimant was dishonest and had forged medical evidence

DWP ‘offer’ to change decision before appeal – less favourable decision by tribunal

Finding that claimant is not a credible witness – whether that must be put to the claimant – whether there is an explicit need to refer to terms of regulation 4(2A) of the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013.