NAWRA meeting in Sunderland

Our next meeting will take place at the National Glass Centre in Sunderland on Friday 11 December 2015.  Thanks to Sunderland City Council for hosting us.

Our guest speakers will be Prof Ted Schrecker, Professor of Global Health Policy at Durham University and Dr David Webster from Glasgow University.

There will be workshops on using ESA safeguarding guidance, the ‘genuine prospect of work’ test for EU migrants, and Universal Credit.

As always, the meeting will be an opportunity to meet fellow welfare rights advisers, ask questions and share ideas.


You must be a member of NAWRA to attend the meeting. If you are not already a member,  find out more about joining.

Regulation 35(2)b of ESA Regulations and subsequent submissions by SoS following this precedent

These paragraphs from a submission made by the Secretary of State are a new indication of how the Secretary of State is attempting to meet the requirements as set out by the decision of IM v SSWP (ESA) [2014] UKUT 412 (AAC). The Secretary of State in the paragraphs 16 to 17 of this submission considers that the most demanding work-related activity would be a referral to Disability Action Dundee.  The least demanding work-related activity everyday would be leaving the house every day.

Suffice to say that the appellant met the requirements not under regulation 35(2b) but under descriptor 1 of schedule 3.  Given the Secretary of State at para 17 when considering work-related activity least demanding stated “ I believe having Mr ….. walk even a couple of metres from his home would benefit him physically….” it is not surprising the First tier Tribunal decision of a schedule 3 mobility descriptor.

I would further add that over the last 4 weeks all other ESA appeal papers have not contained such detail and have returned to “Eastern and Central Scotland” work-related activity provision, which a Regional Judge at First tier Tribunal considered did not meet the requirements of IM.”

Tom Lamb Dundee North Law Centre

The revolving doors of mandatory reconsideration

NAWRA has been very concerned about the implementation of mandatory reconsideration (MR) for some time, particularly in light of the catastrophic drop in appeals and the effects on those who suffer from cognitive impairments.  Consequently, in February this year we sent a survey to members and asked them to feedback to us about how MR was working in practice.  Thanks to everyone who contributed.  We received almost 100 responses from across the welfare rights sector.  Responses were vivid and detailed and members kindly went to some great length explaining some of the shocking issues with how MR was being implemented.

NAWRA member Eri Mountbatten wrote an in-depth article discussing the main findings of that survey entitled Revolving Doors for the May/June 2015 (169) edition of Adviser magazine.  We are grateful to Adviser magazine who have kindly given permission for us to distribute this article to NAWRA members.  We hope you find it useful and informative.

NAWRA will be working hard to campaign for change on this topic.  We will also aim to keep members updated as new information becomes available.