[2024] UKUT 185 (AAC)

Mrs Helen Hawley, who is the Secretary of State’s representative in these appeal proceedings, supports the Appellant’s appeal to the Upper Tribunal in her detailed and helpful submission.

In summary, the Secretary of State’s primary submission is as follows:

Mrs Hawley adds that in reaching its conclusions the FTT “appear to have simply assumed that the claimant would be able to clean himself after an evacuation of the bladder or bowel (or both) within a reasonable time period without adequately explaining how they reached that conclusion given the claimant’s very detailed and extensive written evidence on he how managed his double incontinence on a daily basis” (paragraph 4.12). Thus “there appears to be a distinct lack of reference to the extensive and detailed evidence provided by the claimant concerning his significant difficulties with and the time taken to manage the effects of his double incontinence when determining which point scoring descriptor applied in the claimant’s circumstances within daily living activity 5” (paragraph 4.15).

Mrs Hawley therefore submits that the FTT erred in law and so its decision should be set aside. She accepts that the facts and circumstances of the case are sufficiently recorded to enable the Upper Tribunal to make the decision that the FTT should have made, namely that the Appellant satisfies the criteria to be awarded 8 points for daily living descriptor 5f (needs assistance to be able to manage incontinence of both bladder and bowel).