Background
Background
On 18 May 2022 the Appellant (whom I will refer to as the “claimant”) applied for a Personal Independence Payment by telephone. On 3 October 2022, following an assessment by a healthcare professional, a decision maker for the Secretary of State decided the claimant scored no points in relation to either the daily living or mobility activities and therefore didn’t meet the conditions to entitlement to any Personal Independence Payment from 18 May 2022 (the “SoS Decision”).
The claimant didn’t agree with the SoS Decision and requested a mandatory reconsideration. While the reconsideration decision maker awarded the claimant 6 points under the daily living activities (reflecting a need for prompting from another person to prepare food, to wash and bathe and to dress and undress). However, this was still insufficient for him to qualify for an award of Personal Independence Payment. The claimant appealed to the First-tier Tribunal.
On 19 April 2024 a three-member panel of the First-tier Tribunal convened at Coventry for an oral hearing of the claimant’s appeal against the SoS Decision (the “Tribunal”). The Tribunal was assisted by a Slovak interpreter booked by HMCTS. Following the hearing, the Tribunal decided the claimant didn’t score any points and didn’t qualify for a Personal Independence Payment (the “FtT Decision”).
- Heading
- As the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of an error of law, it is SET ASIDE under section 12(2)(a) and (b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and the case is R
- What this appeal is about
- Background
- The permission stage
- The positions of the parties
- Why I have allowed the appeal
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 220 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)