Backdating letter


27-May-2020 15:02

At this time, I said that I would also provide regular updates to colleagues, hence my letter today.

Since my decision, the Department has begun engaging with a range of key stakeholders to deliver the implementation of the MH judgment.

This includes engaging with a range of stakeholders on implementing the judgment, designing and introducing an administrative exercise to identify claimants who may now be eligible for a higher PIP award.

backdating letter-25

Webcam en vivo xxx gratis en mexico

backdating letter-46

Xxx large wemen chat

Whilst work is being taken forward at speed, we need to ensure that the exercise is carried out thoroughly and sensitively. However, if a decision is made on your claim before this new guidance is established and you are affected by the change then your claim will subsequently be identified by the Department and payments will be backdated.• Working to design the complex administrative exercise to identify those claimants who may be entitled to a higher PIP award as a result of the judgment. Work is already underway to engage with a range of key stakeholders on the required changes. Supporting people with mental health conditions is a top priority for this Government, with a higher proportion receiving the higher rates of PIP than the equivalent under the legacy benefit Disability Living Allowance (DLA).We carefully considered the judgment and decided not to appeal the outcome in order to provide certainty to claimants with mental health conditions.Supporting people with disabilities continues to be a key priority for this Government, and I hope this update will reassure claimants.

Kind Regards The Rt Hon Esther Mc Vey MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS Annex A – Stakeholder and MP FAQs Implementation of the judgment What does the MH judgment mean?

“Letter dated 29/03/2018 from Esther Mc Vey to colleagues regarding the implementation of the Upper Tribunal HM judgement following the decision not to appeal the High Court judgement in the judicial review challenge against regulation 2(4) of the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) (Amendment) Regulations 2017 S. Whilst I accepted this outcome l made clear at the time that the Department does not accept all the details within the judgment.