Registered blind higher rate DLA mobility appeal

My husband is regoistered blind and has just been turned down for the reccent higher mobility DLA (for the severelly visually impaired). He wants to appeal, but we have a few concerns that he could risk loosing his middle rate care if it goes to tribunal. Does anyone know:

If middle rate care is normally awarded for people who are registered blind
Is he at risk of loosing this at appeal
does he have much hope of gaininig higher rate mobility at appeal. I have given his 'case' below.


I am appealing on the grounds that the severity of my visual loss has not been taken into consideration. As you can see from the medical report provided my right eye meets the criteria. My left eye has a very restricted visual field also meeting the requirements this does not seem to have been taken into account and it appears that what was considered was the acuity in a very small part of my left eye. The decision seems to have been based on the function of less than 5% of the total vision available to a fully sighted person which does not aid my mobility in any way.

ash wrote:

My husband is regoistered blind and has just been turned down for the reccent higher mobility DLA (for the severelly visually impaired). He wants to appeal, but we have a few concerns that he could risk loosing his middle rate care if it goes to tribunal. Does anyone know:

If middle rate care is normally awarded for people who are registered blind
Is he at risk of loosing this at appeal
does he have much hope of gaininig higher rate mobility at appeal. I have given his 'case' below.


I am appealing on the grounds that the severity of my visual loss has not been taken into consideration. As you can see from the medical report provided my right eye meets the criteria. My left eye has a very restricted visual field also meeting the requirements this does not seem to have been taken into account and it appears that what was considered was the acuity in a very small part of my left eye. The decision seems to have been based on the function of less than 5% of the total vision available to a fully sighted person which does not aid my mobility in any way.

the new rules for getting dla and being registered blind are very strick and set down in the regulations

if you have a copy of CVI ? I think its called ...call the RNIB advice line and speak to the benefits expert there they will be able to tell you if the sight is bad enough to get higher rate I am registered but dont get higher rate under new rules

also if you speake to RNIB they will tell you middle care is NOT always awarded for being blind often you need some other medical problem too that means you need help durring the day or night with medication blind in the past has been good just for lower lower BUT its not set in stone

rules below
Visual acuity is the measurement of your central vision and how well you can see detail. It is assessed using an eye test chart called the Snellen scale. Your visual field is what you can see around you; this is also called your peripheral vision.

If your visual acuity is:

1.less than 3/60, meaning you only can read the top line of an eye test chart from 3 metres away, you will qualify for the higher rate
2.more than 3/60 but less than 6/60, meaning you can only read the top line of the eye test chart from 6 metres away, your visual field will need to be considered as well.
If your visual acuity falls into the second category, then you will only qualify if you also have both:

•a complete loss of your peripheral vision
•and severely restricted central vision ("tunnel vision"), meaning no more than 10 degrees in diameter.
If your visual acuity is better than 6/60 you will not qualify, for example if your acuity is 6/36 or 6/18.




call the RNIB and read that link I posted each case is different but still within the rules laid down

Thanks originaldave; the RNIB advised him to appeal (having attended tribunals myself I had concerns that he could be at risk of loosing his care component the RNIB didn't raise this). You have confirmed my fears and the fact I think he is unlikely to win on appeal.
Anyone else have expereince of this? I am wondering if we should appeal in writing but not risk going to the panel or is this just as risky??

ash wrote:

Thanks originaldave; the RNIB advised him to appeal (having attended tribunals myself I had concerns that he could be at risk of loosing his care component the RNIB didn't raise this). You have confirmed my fears and the fact I think he is unlikely to win on appeal.
Anyone else have expereince of this? I am wondering if we should appeal in writing but not risk going to the panel or is this just as risky??

you need a mod to help, at a tribunal they can overturn what a DM has done... but I am not sure where they stand when the DM has made an award based only on a regulation.... where the award is based on fact based evidance supplied as a legal document as the CVI is

ash wrote:

Thanks originaldave; the RNIB advised him to appeal (having attended tribunals myself I had concerns that he could be at risk of loosing his care component the RNIB didn't raise this). You have confirmed my fears and the fact I think he is unlikely to win on appeal.
Anyone else have expereince of this? I am wondering if we should appeal in writing but not risk going to the panel or is this just as risky??

Hi,

Regarding the appeal in writing, statistically appeals 'on paper' are generally less successful than an 'oral appeal' where the claimant attends the appeal and the panel can both see and ask questions of the claimant.

I have just been checking through the legislation which is as Dave has pointed out.

As with most 'new' legislation there is always a period where although the legislation is in force, having checked, there are currently no upper tribunal rulings offering a judges guidance on the interpretation of the regulations.

I would definitely consult with the RNIB and obtain individual advice on your husbands case.

Pete

Hi,

As Pete says 'paper hearings' have a lower success rate than oral appeals. For the former it's only about 20%, where as 'oral hearing' are currently around 45%.

The reason for this is that with 'paper hearings', the tribunal don't have the opportunity to see you, nor to ask you questions and vice versa. Pretty much like DWP Decision Makers (DM)

If there is some reason why you don't want to appear before a tribunal, then you can ask the DM to look at your case again, called a 'reconsideration'.

However, if you lodge an appeal , see Appeal against a benefit decision (leaflet GL24)

The DM automatically 'reconsiders' their decision before sending it to the Tribunals Service to action.

Hope this is of help.

Jim