A HARROW man left partially paralysed after being struck by a train three decades ago has endured a two-year fight for disability benefit he believes he deserves.
Chris Ellis, of Churchill Place, was a teenager when he was run over in 1979 at South Harrow station and suffered injuries to his brain, back and central nervous system, damaging his left leg to the extent he cannot walk either far or fast.
The 47-year-old has been trying to register for disability living allowance (DLA) but says the Department of Work and Pensions keeps rejecting his claim based on flawed medical evaluations, and that a single thorough check-up would prove his eligibility.
Unemployed Mr Ellis, who receives incapacity benefit, said: "I have already lost around £40,000 since I first saw a benefit adviser in 1990. When I told her my story, she didn't believe me and refused to check with my GP.
"She just said: 'You're all right now'. I then gave up because I felt so deflated. In recent years, people said I should be getting DLA so I reapplied."
He claims two doctors sent to evaluate his condition after intervention by Harrow East MP Tony McNulty (Labour) either did not carry out proper checks or came to rushed conclusions that painted an artificially milder picture of his problems, thereby ultimately denying him benefit.
Mr Ellis twice appealed the decision to DWP tribunal hearings but lost both cases, most recently in April.
He said: "I have written to 10 Downing Street but even Gordon Brown couldn't get them to assess me properly. I have every right to be assessed for this benefit so why won't they do their job? I have no idea what information they actually have on me. Judging by their past attitude, I should think very little indeed."
Mr Ellis added: "These benefit advisers can pick and choose who they give these benefits to. They have been given too much power."
The DWP said it could not comment on individual cases.
However a statement of the findings of Mr Ellis's first tribunal said: "The tribunal accepted the appellant suffers from some dis-comfort and pain but noted the appellant comments that he is able to manage his pain without pain relief.
"The evidence of the examining medical practitioner confirmed the appellant is able to manage all care needs unassisted. We concluded the appellant does not satisfy the requirements for an award for the higher rate of the mobility component."