Scottish tribunal failed to provide adequate reasons for selecting ADP mobility descriptor that applied to unfamiliar as opposed to familiar journeys

KK v Social Security Scotland

Here are the main points from the decision document:

1. Appeal Outcome:
   • The appeal by KK against Social Security Scotland was allowed.
   • The decision of the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland (FTS) dated 13 February 2025 was quashed and re-made.
2. Revised Decision:
   • KK is entitled to the enhanced rate of the mobility component of Adult Disability Payment (ADP) from 5 May 2024 to 5 May 2026.
   • KK has a severely limited ability to carry out mobility activities, scoring 12 points under mobility descriptor 1(f).
3. Background:
   • KK’s initial application for ADP was partially successful, awarding the standard rate for daily living but no mobility component.
   • After a re-determination and an appeal to the FTS, KK was awarded the standard rate for the mobility component.
4. Grounds for Appeal:
   • KK argued that the FTS failed to adequately explain why descriptor 1(d) was applied instead of 1(f).
   • The respondent did not oppose the appeal, acknowledging the FTS’s decision lacked sufficient explanation.
5. Discussion and Evidence:
   • The FTS found KK’s evidence credible regarding his inability to follow both familiar and unfamiliar journeys due to mental health issues.
   • The Upper Tribunal for Scotland (UTS) agreed with KK’s submission and re-made the decision, applying descriptor 1(f).
6. Next Steps:
   • Parties aggrieved by this decision may seek permission to appeal to the Court of Session on a point of law within 30 days.