Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
You haven’t pointed out the truth though, all too often you are offering another mere subjective opinion, similar in vain to the “man in the pub” in the absence of material facts about the individuals involved or the claims made.
It’s total bull from you time and again. Anything to depend the DWP when against any measure going their performance in administering benefits is atrocious and getting worse. A Government department failing to administer laws it creates is nothing short of scandalous and for any supposedly “neutral” person to clutch at straws to defend them is, frankly, despicable.
|
I point out the facts that are mentioned in the SAME article about the individual. How is that subjective opinion? Being "subjective" and not being fully aware of the claimants situation works both ways. For the most part, having medical condition X doesn't automatically mean that you are eligible for benefits. In that example that was used, the claim is that he was turned down for ESA. The claim never got that far. The bit in the article that initially raised my suspicions was that he was diagnosed in July, but the suggestion was that an assessment and decision had been made a few months later. That timescale was unlikely, and sure enough the reason he was "turned down", was the income of his partner, NOT his health or lack of it. No DWP decision on ESA had really been made.
EG Man alleged by man sitting next to somebody else(ie "man in the pub" situation) to have died after having been found "fit for work", HADN'T been found "fit for work". That NOT subjective, that is FACT.
Where have the Government dept failed to administer laws, expect where AFTER the fact somebody comes along and says the way something has been applied is suddenly illegal, when it wasn't before?
---------- Post added at 23:39 ---------- Previous post was at 23:28 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
No they don’t. No court can amend statute law - not even the Supreme Court. Courts create precedent in case law, but this is not amending law, it is creating law in a previously grey or undefined area.
|
They are not amending the law, but those decisions do change the rules and how they've been applied in the past. They effectively add amendments to the law. The DWP decision makers are meant to stick to those amendments. Their guidance supplies references to the base law as well as those amendments.
It is still beneficial to look at those other decisions in conjunction with the base law to get a fuller picture of how the decisions are meant to be arrived at.