Decision Maker Appeal scam
Step 1 - A Decision Maker makes a decision: if they create a sanction then you get the opportunity to appeal, otherwise nothing to worry about.
Step 2 - You Appeal asking for the Decision Maker to review his or hers decision. In most cases s/he will not bother changing the decision or looking at it again. If the arrogant bastards consider themselves gods and therefore correct then there would be no need to bother checking their consistently perfect decisions.
Step 3 - They prepare for a Tribunal. You can't take them to a tribunal, they take you to the Appeal Tribunal. You have to defend.
Step 4 - The Tribunal. You Vs Secretary of State. No one from DWP attends. Tribunal judges don't really consider the paperwork but only verbal content, which typically consists of irrelevant personal questions. As the Respondent (DWP) doesn't attend you can't debate their allegations and don't get the real chance of sticking your defence across.
Respondents are immune from losing their case by telling lies or fabricating evidence under tribunal law whereas if you on the other hand tell a lie thats enough to lose your case even if would have won it anyway.
Appeal Tribunals are heavily weighted against the person Appealing which makes it a nasty unfair system and rather pointless.
Appeal Tribunal
To recap:
* Tribunals have no legal power to enforce its decisions
* Tribunals can’t enforce or persuade the DWP to pay outstanding owed benefit
* Tribunals can’t enforce a deadline of payment
* Tribunals therefore allow such payment to be suspended while they appeal to the decision
* Tribunals can withdraw or revise their decisions
Are Appeal Tribunals Really Independent?
Not at all. Like I mentioned above, the Respondent is the Secretary of State; the Secretary of State is also the person who implemented the law and delegates powers to the judges etc.
Are Appeal Tribunals Really Impartial?
Not at all. The law is sided with the Respondent. The law mentions numerous clauses whereby should the Appellant lie, give false evidence etc. that the Appeal could be thrown out etc. however, they don’t exist for the Respondent who still has a fair chance even with fabricated evidence etc.
Whats the point?
If the Appeal Tribunal really has no enforcement powers (only gives advice to DWP) and the system is legally structured against the person appealing then it isn’t fair or useful for that person at all.