Login FormClose

Free ESA, PIP and DLA Updates

With over 140,000 subscribers our fortnightly updates bulletin is the UK's leading source of benefits news. Get the facts about what's changing, how it affects you and how to prepare.   Get your free benefits updates now.

Professional Members

We support both claimants and professionals.  These are just some of the organisations who have subscribed to Benefits and Work:

  • Royal College of Nursing
  • Spinal Injuries Association
  • Chesterfield Law Centre
  • Coventry Mind
  • Birmingham Citizens Advice Bureau
  • Colchester Borough Council Welfare Rights

Read more

Welcome, Guest
Username: Password:
Remember me. Note: ticking this may affect members file download ability.

TOPIC: support group

support group 1 year 8 months ago #136863

  • Gordon
  • Forum Moderator

From your post it sounds as if you made the request for re-assessment in your name.

If you are not your son's appointee, then you have no legal right to make requests in regard to your son's benefit, only he can do this, if this is what has happened then the DWP would be required to reject any such request.

A letter in his name and signed by him should be accepted.

Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: june cunningham

support group 1 year 7 months ago #137465


we got a letter from the Customers Service Business Manager with regard to the request for supercession of the decision made dated 16 May 2014. The reply states that as we are not Andrews appointees they have used implied/
implicit consent to reply to us. I thought that at this request a new se3t of forms would be issued for completion but the person dealing with it as above named has instead passed the letter with supporting evidence? (no mention what this is) to the Specialist Decision Making team and asked them to carry out an anytime review of the decision made on 16 May 2014.
They state that if the review does not go in Andrews favour then a MR should be submitted .if during the MR process the decision is not changed ,an appeal can be sent directly to HMCTS. The decision they made re the letter Which we did not class as the supercession and was titled Application for supercession and I expected the claim form to be issued.
their letter of refusal states that the evidence provided was the letter from the consultant which states the dangers presented to Andrew on a daily basis and the other evidence they cite is that of their Healthcare
Professionall (
The administrator has disabled public write access.

support group 1 year 7 months ago #137466

the letter was accepted by the Customer Service Business Manager and the letter was passed to the Specialist Decision Making team who were requested to carry out an anytime review of the decision of the 16 May 2014. they say if the decision does not go in Andrews favour a MR
should be submitted. if during the MR process the decision is not changed then an appeal can be sent to HMCTS.
The letter for request of supercession was refused after consideration of the letter from the Consultant and the view of the depts. Healthcare Professional, stating that in their opinion there is insufficient evidence that his health has deteriorated. How can we prove that it has? His consultant states that he is not under control with the drugs and that he must undertake certain tasks with caution as he can suffer a myoclonic jerk at any time. He says this could cause injury to himself and others if say carrying hot liquids or operating machinery, being just a couple of examples. He also says that he has weekly events where he will fall to the ground and be unable to move for up to 20mins,f. I have further clarified this to them in the letter asking for supercession that it could happen near water where he may fall in and drown,
on crossing a road when he could fall in front of oncoming traffic, he could fall onto rail lines,
or off a bridge, any of which could be fatal. He has had hospital treatment in the past for injuries caused as result of these falls. He has no warning signs to alert him to these occurrances at all, so it is impossible to predict when or in what circumstances they will occur so this causes further danger to those in his immediate vicinity,. If he eas holding a knife he could cause injury and has .to himself and he has `We are writing to say we do not agree with the decision Look forward to your reply
The administrator has disabled public write access.

support group 1 year 7 months ago #137473

  • Gordon
  • Forum Moderator

All posts are held in a moderation area until they are released into the forum by a Moderator, we are normally online 2pm-3:30pm and 8pm-9:30pm Monday to Friday.

There are a number of issues that you need to deal with.

First if you are not your sons appointee then you cannot act on his behalf in regard to benefits. There are two options available to you going forward; your son makes any requests in his name, even if you provide the detail, you may still need to explain this when dealing with the DWP and it's contractors. Or, you become his appointee, the DWP will need to be satisfied that your son cannot deal with these matters on his own. See


With regard to the request for him to be re-assessed for the Support Group.

First the DWP need to be convinced that there has been a deterioration in his conditions, they will be looking at how he was when placed in the WRAG and how is now to see whether they believe a change has occurred. Ideally the change needs to have been documented as medical evidence. If they are not satisfied that a change has occurred then they are not required to assess your son for the Support Group.

Next, to be placed in the Support Group he needs to meet one or more of the Support Group Criteria, his condition may have deteriorated but if you cannot show that he qualifies he will remain in the WRAG.

Which of the SG Descriptors do you believe that he now meets? There is a list of these in the ESA Claim Guides.


Your latest post mentions a Decision on 16 May 2014 was this the Decision that placed him in the WRAG? You can only challenge this Decision if the request is made within 13 months of the Decision, by my calculation this period has now elapsed and I would be surprised if the DWP will entertain any form of Reconsideration now, even though the CSBM has indicated otherwise. Even if they did then they can only consider his limitations as they were at that time, any change since then is specifically excluded from any Reconsideration or Appeal.

Going forward, your only opportunity to have him moved to the SG is for an authorised person to make a request for Supersession based on there being a documented deterioration in his condition such that he now meets one of the SG Descriptors.

Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
The administrator has disabled public write access.

support group 1 year 7 months ago #137525

The claim has been on-going because of errors made at the decision 16 may 2014 -No report was issued to Andrew at the time and we explained t his to them. This was to do with a request to be placed in support group and he did not receive this until 29.10.2014. we have requested this to be looked at again under exceptional circumstances as he is at substantial risk to himself and others under mental health/physical health. He had issues with his GP and has not seen him since .I have explained all of this to his Epilepsy practitioner and he thinks we need to have him see his GP
because of his risk of suicide. he has been in the wrag group for over 10 years.
The letter sent was a request for supercession.

I spoke to his Consultant yesterday who confirmed the repeat tests he has asked for to see any changes in his brain causing deterioration in him are being dealt with and he is on the waiting list .His previous appointment was cancelled on the day by the hospital as they did not have a bed for him. They require him to stay in hospital for a week for this.
The dwp were informed at the time that tests were required.
is this enough info?
The administrator has disabled public write access.

support group 1 year 7 months ago #137528

Just to clarify we are writing everything with Andrew signing .
Thanks, sorry I had not made this clear.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Moderators: bro58, Gordon, Mrs Hurtyback, shelam
Time to create page: 1.450 seconds