§ Major R. WILLIAMSasked. the Minister of Pensions, if he will re-examine the case of William Bulpitt, now residing at Birling, near West Mailing, Kent; and is he aware that this man was discharged from the Royal Air Force on 21st February, 1919, placed on full pension for six months, and since then has received nothing, though he is quite incapable of earning anything?
Mr. ROBERTSThis man was demobilised from the Royal Air Force in January, 1919, after seven months' home service having enlisted in July, 1918. There is no record of hospital treatment during service, nor did the man report sick to the medical officer of his unit. He made no claim on demobilisation, but in October, 1920, he claimed for rheumatoid arthritis, for which, pending consideration of his claim, he was granted treatment and allowances for a period of six months, no award of pension being made. On full consideration of all the circumstances of the case it was decided that the rheumatism which was admittedly the result of "septic poisoning from pyorrhoea," could not be regarded as either due to or aggravated by his short period of military service at home. On an appeal being made to the Pensions Appeal Tribunal the Ministry's decision was upheld.
§ Mr. GROVESasked the Minister of Pensions if he will investigate the circumstances attending the stoppage of a pension from John Cray, 21, Cullum Street, Stratford, No. 566,094?
Mr. ROBERTSI regret the interruption of payment which arose from the man's change of residence from Canada to England and the consequent transfer of documents from the Canadian authorities. Payment of pension has now been resumed.
§ Mr. GROVESasked the Minister of Pensions whether he will inquire into the circumstances attending the refusal of his local Department to grant to Mr. William Pattinson of 14, William Street, Stratford, the right to appeal against his pension assessment; and, as the man was ill at the time that he should have applied, whether 'he can grant a further appeal?
Mr. ROBERTSI am unable to find that, in this case, the man in question2344W was, in fact, refused the right of appeal, although he did not make an appeal within the statutory period. If, however, he claims, and can show, that he was prejudiced by illness in preferring his appeal within the time allowed by law, he should communicate with the local office, and the case will then be put to the tribunal, with whom it will rest to determine whether, in the circumstances, they are empowered under the statutory provisions to hear the appeal.