![[2024] UKUT 271 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
“The Appellant had previously applied for PIP in 2020, but at the time there was no mention of a problem with either knee. The Tribunal noted that in November 2022 a specialist had said that she had f
“The Appellant had previously applied for PIP in 2020, but at the time there was no mention of a problem with either knee. The Tribunal noted that in November 2022 a specialist had said that she had full functionality of both knees and no swelling. He advised the Appellant to go to the gym, which would be unlikely if he thought she was incapable of physical activity….”
Unfortunately, the FTT make no reference to the findings of the Health Care Professional (HCP) noted under History of conditions that the claimant has: “Patella tendonitis, osteoarthritis, deep bone bruising, degenerative meniscus tear in the right knee pain & discomfort (September 2021)…Pain in arch of right foot (7 months ago)…High blood pressure (15 years ago)…Back pain (since 2021)…Adhesive Capsulitis (left shoulder) (May 2019)…”.
The FTT also fails to refer to the evidence from the claimant’s GP dated 31/8/23 included at addition A of the FTT bundle which states:
- Heading
- E FITZPATRICK
- Proceedings before the Upper Tribunal
- “The Appellant had previously applied for PIP in 2020, but at the time there was no mention of a problem with either knee. The Tribunal noted that in November 2022 a specialist had said that she had f
- “…She has a medical history of osteoarthritis of her right knee and Plantar Fasciitis of her right foot. She has discomfort in her left knee too, which is due to the compensation effect from osteoarth
- Observations made at the hearing
- Regulation 4(2A) Safely
- Conclusions