![[2023] UKUT 151 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Disposal of the appeal
Disposal of the appeal
I therefore allow the Appellant’s appeal to the Upper Tribunal, although not for the reasons that he contends. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal made on 11 August 2021 under file number SC065/18/00926 was made in error of law. Under section 12(2)(a) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act (TCEA) 2007, I set that decision aside. As the rate of PIP to which the Appellant is entitled is not in dispute, there is no point in remitting the case back to another FTT for yet another re-hearing. Instead I re-make the First-tier Tribunal’s decision as follows:
The Appellant’s appeal against the Secretary of State’s decision dated 12 May 2018 is allowed.
Daily living descriptors 1b, 3b, 4c, 6c, 9c and 10b (13 points in total) apply, as do mobility descriptors 1d and 2b (14 points in total).
The Appellant is accordingly entitled to both the enhanced rate of the daily living component of PIP and the enhanced rate of the mobility component of PIP for the period from 16 January 2018 to 15 January 2028.
In effect, I am substituting the correct decision that the FTT itself made and announced before it allowed itself to be persuaded to change its mind.
Miss Fernandes for the Secretary of State advises that the Department has implemented the FTT’s (erroneous) decision of 11 August 2021 and paid the Appellant arrears going back to 26 August 2017. As a result of my decision, those arrears should only have been paid back to 16 January 2018. It is not strictly a matter that arises in the present proceedings, but I simply record there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that any overpayment was the fault of the Appellant. There is no suggestion that he either misrepresented or failed to disclose any material fact.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal made on 11 August 2021 under number SC065/18/00926 was made in error of law. Under section 12(2)(a) a
- This appeal to the Upper Tribunal: the result
- The benefits adjudication and appeals machinery
- The Appellant’s first Personal Independence Payment FTT appeal
- Pausing there
- The Appellant’s second Personal Independence Payment FTT appeal
- The proceedings and submissions before the Upper Tribunal
- The Upper Tribunal’s analysis
- The First-tier Tribunal’s disregard of the Upper Tribunal’s direction on remittal
- The First-tier Tribunal’s confusion as to the correct date for the supersession
- The First-tier Tribunal changed its mind after announcing its decision
- Summary of Upper Tribunal’s analysis
- Disposal of the appeal
- Conclusions