Northern Ireland - Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions

[1998] NISSCSC C51/98(IB) (11 March 1999)

 


Decision No: C51/98(IB)

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 SOCIAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTIONS AND BENEFITS (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 SOCIAL SECURITY (CONSEQUENTIAL PROVISIONS) (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACT 1992 INCAPACITY BENEFIT Appeal to the Social Security Commissioner on a question of law from the decision of the Newtownards Social Security Appeal Tribunal dated 23 March 1998 DECISION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER
1. This is an appeal by the claimant, leave having been granted by a Tribunal Chairman, against a decision dated 23 March 1998 of a Social Security Appeal Tribunal (hereinafter called "the Tribunal") sitting at Newtownards. That Tribunal had disallowed Mrs W...'s appeal against a disallowance of Incapacity Benefit from and including 18 December 1997. The basis of the disallowance by both the Adjudication Officer and the Tribunal was that Mrs W... failed the All Work Test which she was required to satisfy to obtain the relevant benefit.
2. Mrs W...'s grounds of appeal were contained in an undated letter received by the Independent Tribunal Service on 20 July 1998. Mr McAvoy of Central Adjudication Services, acting for the Adjudication Officer, made observations on the appeal by letter dated 16 October 1998. This letter was sent to Mrs W... for her to comment and in response she sent a further medical report dated 3 November 1998. I am, of course, unable to take on board this medical report as it was not before the Tribunal.
3. My decision is that the Tribunal's decision is not in error of law and the appeal is dismissed.
4. The grounds given for the appeal were that the Tribunal failed to give an adequate statement of the reasons for its decision and the findings of fact on which it was based. The appeal letter went on to say that there was no indication in the findings and reasons that the Tribunal considered any of the descriptors in any great depth and the reasons given for its decision were scant. It was also submitted that the Tribunal had not given any great consideration to the medical evidence saying that Mrs W... was quite badly affected by exertion.
5. Mr McAvoy opposed the appeal stating that the Tribunal's reasons made it quite clear that the Tribunal preferred the medical evidence relied on by the Adjudication Officer to that submitted by Mrs W.... Mr McAvoy also submitted that the findings and reasons were adequate and satisfied the requirements of regulation 23(3A) of the Social Security (Adjudication) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1995. He further submitted that the Tribunal had had regard to the medical report from Mrs W...'s Consultant Physician, Dr N...; the Tribunal had recorded under a 'Reasons' heading: "Impressed by report of Dr N... but not helpful to appellant's case".
6. Having read the Tribunal's decision it appears to me that the findings of fact were adequate. They are set out in considerable detail in the document which has become known as the "score sheet" for the All Work Test and which contains the Tribunal's findings of fact on the functional limitations in that test. Similarly with regard to the reasons from reading those it appears to me quite clear why the Tribunal reached the decision it did. It obviously, as Mr McAvoy has said, preferred the medical evidence in the Adjudication Officer's submission to the evidence given by the appellant and her husband. It was entitled to do so. With regard to Dr N...'s report the Tribunal stated that it was impressed by the report but that it was not helpful to Mrs W...'s case. I can see no indication that the Tribunal did not pay sufficient attention particularly to Dr N...'s report. It has not unquestioningly accepted the evidence by the medical referee service doctor. It has, in fact, increased the points awarded on the All Work Test and it seems to me that this was obviously on the basis of the evidence presented by the appellant and her husband in so far as the Tribunal accepted that evidence.
7. Having read all the evidence in the case it appears to me that the Tribunal's decision is one to which it was entitled to come on the evidence. I am unable to find any error in the decision and I therefore dismiss the appeal.
8. As a further matter I should mention that as stated above Mrs W... did present to me further medical evidence which was not before the Tribunal in the form of the report of 3 November 1998. If Mrs W... considers that her condition has worsened since the time of the Tribunal's decision she is at liberty to reapply for Incapacity Benefit.

(Signed): M.F.Brown

COMMISSIONER

11 March 1999