Reconsideration or Appeal request?

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #31695
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Can I have your opinions please, as to what you would treat as an ‘Appeal’.

    If a decision has been made, and a letter is in within one month and states the word ‘Appeal’ – and the original decision can not be changed, would you then send this off to TTS as an appeal??

    A lot of letters mention the word ‘Appeal’ – but clearly want the LA to look again at the decision. I think it would be difficult to pass every letter with the word ‘Appeal’ included to TTS???

    Just wondered what other LA’s are doing??

    Also, how do you search for previous threads?? – I am sure this issue must have come up before???

    Thanks

    #88644
    Anonymous
    Guest

    [quote:9341d6df8a]Also, how do you search for previous threads?? – I am sure this issue must have come up before??? [/quote:9341d6df8a]
    Click on “search”. Its up at the top, underneath the coloured tabs, next to “FAQ”. 😉

    Here’s a recent thread where this topic has been previously discussed
    http://hbinfo.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20763

    #88645
    Kevin D
    Participant

    This issue has indeed been debated many times before and there is a fairly sharp divide.

    There are those who strongly believe if the word “appeal” is used, it is not for LAs to second guess what a claimant wants. UTJs (and Cmmrs before) have consistently criticised LAs for taking the easy route.

    However, there are those who believe their judgement is good enough to distinguish between what they *think* is a proper appeal and what they *think* is, in reality, a recon request.

    For what it’s worth, I vehemently fall within the first group. There is no legal basis on which a LA should be deciding that a letter asking for an appeal is in fact something else. It is for TTS to decide on the admissibility of an “appeal”. If a LA is so confident it is right in treating an “appeal” as a recon, why not refer it to TTS asking for confirmation? I doubt TTS would reject a single case.

    One other point. If a LA fails to deal with a letter using the word appeal as an appeal, it may well leave the matter open at a later date – even years later. Suppose a significant o/p is at issue and the clmt goes to a WRO / CAB to seek advice. The rep discovers the existence of the letter. The rep may well argue it is an outstanding appeal and insist it is forwarded to TTS. Had it been referred to TTS in the first instance, the issue would never have arisen.

    There is a recent UTD (unfortunately, I can’t find which one) where the Judge made the point that the amount of work that may be created, or the level of inconvenience, was irrelevant. However, LAs have been criticised in a number of other fairly recent UTDs for the manner in which they handle appeals and related matters. For example, in differing contexts:

    [b:f8714caf24]CH/3080/2008[/b:f8714caf24] – LA reminded that documents relevant to an appeal MUST be provided (this follows CH/3240/2007).

    [b:f8714caf24]CSH/0067/2010[/b:f8714caf24] – LA criticised; not for a FtT or UT to construe differently from what is plainly said {slight edit to reflect UT language}.

    [b:f8714caf24]CH/3021/2009[/b:f8714caf24] – The UTJ observed that the LA’s submission to the FtT was “…one of the least helpful submissions…ever seen…”.

    #88646
    Nicky
    Participant

    I agree with Kevin.

    If the customer says they want to appeal then it’s an appeal.

    Otherwise are you going to tell them you’ve dealt with their “appeal” and if they still disagree they can, erm…..appeal…..again?

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.