Tribunal & Legal Challenges - Flawed PIP Assessment

Hello MD Bond,

I really admire your tenacity in pursuing this to the bitter end because I would not have been brave enough to do so. I wouldn't presume to advise you what to do next, especially as all the Moderators who have given you advice already and shared their experiences are so much more knowledgeable that I am, but please don't let this overwhelm you so much that it becomes detrimental to your health in other ways. Perhaps having gone through such an awful tribunal, nothing else will seem as bad and I wish you luck with whatever you decide to do next, but I do feel concerned for you, as I know from experience how this sort of thing can take over your life. I'm easily intimidated when it comes to dealing with those in authority, so I'm in awe of everyone on the forum who have taken on repeated legal challenges in respect of tribunals, etc. More power to you all, but I just could not do it!

Keep us all updated and best wishes to you,

Wendy Woo

Hi there...Have been catching up on your posts. I just wanted to suggest that it might be the most effective strategy to focus on the faults, as you see them, that happened during the tribunal. These will be able to be seen as breaches of guidance and what should happen in a tribunal, which is verifiable evidence especially as there is audio back up. This is something that is provable.

I, and this is only a personal opinion, think that if you question the judge's independence this will become a diversion and it becomes more personal and nebulous than focusing on errors of law. As someone who has worked in local and central government, I would not think that the argument that if someone works in local government it is a barrier to their independence will stand up. I think the review could argue that being head of legal in a LA puts someone in a good position to understand the intricacies of a tribunal, and as I say, I think this would become a distraction from the main points you have made, which are around the tribunal being unfair and not examining the evidence.

Local government does not administer PIP so I am unclear what the head of legal for a local government would be protecting in a benefits tribunal. Indeed there is often tension between local and central government so the opposite argument could be applied!!
This is just my opinion, but I think your most effective challenge is to focus on the three or four key elements of the tribunal that you do not think adhered to the guidance, especially where there is audio evidence to back you up.

All the best and let us know how you get on
Anji