War Pension Appeal-Help

[lawman]

Gratefulfor any help.
I have been asked to attend an appeal at the War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation Chamber. I will be acting as representative (non legal) for an old friend. Does anyone have any experience of these tribunals? I am aware it is rather informal however, how does the actual tribunal play out? He is appealing a5-14% attributable hearing loss therefore, no award. I think we hold a strong position based on issues they have not considered or ignored. I do hope that the SPVA rep who attends is as competent as the CPS.

 

[busby1971]

Have a chat with either SSAFA or the RBL before you go, the RBL have para legals who do this kind of thing all the time.

It might have an informal set up but they are very serious places so don't be lulled in to a false sense of security, always respect the bench.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

[MrsMakkaPakka]

Hiya I had a tribunal in jan at the local court. I had my husband as a witness there and for support. Also someone from the rbl was representing me as can't afford a solicitor. Basically you sit at a desk and in front of you, you have a gp, an officer and someone a military version of a judge. Sitting next to me was my rbl rep and to my left a spva rep. They ask questions on how your disability affects normal day to day and they compare you to someone of the same age. Its very in depth and they try several times to catch you out etc. Im going through the whole process again at the moment as due to apparent lack of evidence they couldn't up my disability rate from 20% to at least 30% the rbl was certain I was going to get. Need any info feel free to message me will try help as much as I can

 

[olliepop]

Hi, I took the AFCS to tribunal in Jan 2012. As has been said before, you turn up I was represented by the RBL ( They are free and recommended). You sit with your representative and a chappy who argues the SPVA side. And opposite you are three others: A GP, an ex military Officer and a judge. These 3 are impartial and really do listen to your case. The RBL chap introduced himself and I to the panel and then, went into a brief description of why I was appealing the compensation payout. The SPVA chap/chappess argues the case for not giving you anything extra. Then you get your chance to speak about how you are, how you're affected, what you think you ought to receive etc etc. The board listens to more info from the RBL representative and the SPVA side and then they adjourn to make a decision. You are then called back in and listen to their decision ( in my case a very good decision). They can choose to accept the SPVA findings or, to increase (sometimes decrease) the compensation. You then go home. The SPVA have 4 weeks (I think) to appeal the tribunals decision. I printed out the complete list of Tarriffs. Looked at which ones I thought I should receive and wrote next to them why. I then highlighted them (saves you fumbling like a bafoon during tribunal) and took them in with me. Good luck and don't worry the panel are very nice and its done in a completely non military way. Not like a kangaroo court. Although, it is professionally done so, obey the rules of no talking when judge is talking and no butting in. You will be given your chance to speak. Any questions just message. Regards Olliepop.DT_Xtremez_28:

 

[lawman]

Thank you to Mrs M and Ollie. PM'd.

 

[lawman]

Thankyou to all who replied. Hearing was today and we were successful. Argued SPVADoctor got it wrong by relying on non-existent evidence (long story). So chapwill get a weekly and lump £. Took a few hours but certainly worth the appeal.

 

[busby1971]

They still err on the side of no when making their decisions at SPVA and then fall over at tribunal, I've heard of a lot of successful Alaska but never any unsuccessful ones.

They were supposed to being more claimant friendly but I guess this is still an aspiration rather than a policy

Any misunderstandings above caused by predictive texf

 

[olliepop]

Excellent news. Well done

 

[lawman]

Excellent news. Well done

Thanks Ollie and grateful for your help. Went in with my legal mind, aiming argument towards SPVA and the Dr who turned him down. Judge reminded me it was not a court of law and point scoring was not how they worked. Respectfully asked him to consider the facts as we saw them and the flaws as placed before them by SPVA. Explained I was not trying to point score but lay out the facts and the flawed assumptions made. Seems to have worked. SPVA rep did not say a word. Now I know the process better looking forward to having a go again with this next fight. Don't like to see ex service personnel diddled out of what is rightfully theirs when the condition was fully attributable. We played by SPVA rules, they didn't. One thing I did take from it is, there is no discretion in adjudication when it comes to somthing as objective as hearing, the figures are there and must fit the prescribed table to ascertain % level. If there is a secondary issue, they do not have the privilages to take these into consideration. Another issue the Judge mentioned was that he sees numerous appeals from ex-service personnel making claims post medical discharge however, it is still not enough for any payout-I was surprised at this.
Thanks again to all.