Case 1

Mr A is a 56-year-old man with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, which causes breathlessness. Both his consultant and the Doctor who examined him for Disability Living Allowance said he could not walk more than 50 yards but he was refused benefit.

We visited him at home to help him to appeal against the decision. We attended the appeal hearing with him. He was awarded the higher rate of the mobility component of Disability Living Allowance from the date of his claim.

Case 2

Mrs B is a 57-year-old woman who has had four operations for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and to remove the nerve in her right hand . She has also had an operation on her left hand. She was left with a loss of sensation and greatly reduced grip in her right hand.

Despite this she was found fit for work. We helped her to appeal, prepared a written submission for the appeal tribunal and attended the hearing with her. She won her appeal and her Incapacity Benefit was re-instated back to the date it had stopped.

Case 3

Mrs C had worked as a cleaner using heaving floor polishing machines. As a result of this she developed Tenosynovitis, which manifested itself as “trigger finger”. She was assessed as having 8% loss of faculty and a further 8% for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. IIDB was paid. Following surgery for the trigger finger the DWP made the decision that she no longer had Tenosynovitis. To be paid IIDB a claimant must have an assessment of at least 14%. Mrs C now only had 8% for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome so she lost her IIDB.

As she still had symptoms of Tenosynovitis we discussed with her which of her symptoms were related to the Tenosynovitis and attended the appeal hearing with her. After a short hearing and examination she was re-awarded 8 % for Tenosynovitis. This was added to her 8% Carpal Tunnel Syndrome so her benefit was re-instated from the date of stoppage.

Case 4

Mrs D and her husband were homeless following the collapse of their business. Their son bought a flat for them to rent from him so they could be near to their family as they both had health problems which meant they could not work and needed care and support. The local authority made the decision that this was not a commercial agreement and refused to award Housing Benefit or Council Tax Benefit. Mrs D was the claimant. She could not leave the house because of anxiety. We visited her at home, drafted her appeal for her and acted as her representative dealing with the Local Authority.

Case 5

Mr E had had mental health problems for some years. He suffered from depression and acute anxiety. He had taken on some part-time work to help his recovery. This “permitted work” was approved by the DWP. Because of a lack of information from the DWP Mr E mistakenly went over the time limit for this kind of work and this caused all sorts of problems with his benefits including a disallowance for a short period.

He came to us for help with sorting out his benefits. We liased with the DWP to find out the history behind his current situation, advised him on his current position and how any future changes would affect his eligibility for Income Support, Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit. We are now helping him to appeal against the disallowance of benefit and will attend the appeal hearing with him if the decision is not changed before then.