PIP debate-live now

dori2o

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

Draft PIP claim forms, standard letters and other resources :

- forms are here

- standard letters (notifications) are here

- individuals check how Personal Independence Payment affects you tool, here

- 'organisational’ - ‘toolkit here

Thanks Rich.

Not sure if you know, but this DS1500 letter they ask you to submit if not submitted in the past 6 months. Is this something the GP/consultants etc will have a stock of/access to print off, or is the claimant expected to obtain the form and get it completed.

It seems to me that where in the past the GP etc would getthe form from the DWP and complete it, either free of charge or at expense to the DWP, it look to me like it is now the claimant who instigates the contact. Does this therefore mean that the claimant is likely to be charged for this service, just as they could be for getting documents signed, or asking the GP for a letter?

Also, the whole process looks awful.

You have to fill in a form to declare you are/ are not under the special rules for terminally ill patients, and then wait for another form if you are not claiming under the special rules to answer the questions about how your condition affects you.

Does that seem stupid to anyone else, why not just have both sections in the same form. It's just more work, more waste (£, paper, postage), more stress and more time wasted.

Not only are they making it almost impossible to get the benefit in the first place, but they are making it so hard to claim that many people will simply not bother.


Also, it may be worth reposting this on a new thread and seeing if it can be stickied.

Richie-from-the-Boro

dori2o wrote: »

Thanks Rich.

Not sure if you know, but this DS1500 letter they ask you to submit if not submitted in the past 6 months. Is this something the GP/consultants etc will have a stock of/access to print off, or is the claimant expected to obtain the form and get it completed.

It seems to me that where in the past the GP etc would getthe form from the DWP and complete it, either free of charge or at expense to the DWP, it look to me like it is now the claimant who instigates the contact. Does this therefore mean that the claimant is likely to be charged for this service, just as they could be for getting documents signed, or asking the GP for a letter?

Also, the whole process looks awful.

You have to fill in a form to declare you are/ are not under the special rules for terminally ill patients, and then wait for another form if you are not claiming under the special rules to answer the questions about how your condition affects you.

Does that seem stupid to anyone else, why not just have both sections in the same form. It's just more work, more waste (£, paper, postage), more stress and more time wasted.

Not only are they making it almost impossible to get the benefit in the first place, but they are making it so hard to claim that many people will simply not bother.


Also, it may be worth reposting this on a new thread and seeing if it can be stickied.

HiYa dori2o,

TI claims

- the DS1500 was pre-paid by government rather than the usual reimbursement route for a moral and administrative reason
- DWP pays – currently £33.00 for a GPFR and £17.00 for a DS1500 completed by a GP
- the word of the claimant's GP / hospital consultant / specialist nurse was always a sufficiently acceptable level of authority
- indeed a third party [not the terminal patient] could apply on behalf without the patients [potentially harmful] knowledge
- it, the form factual information only ever asked about the condition / treatment received / further treatment planned
- but never asked about prognosis

I'll have to read up on it .. .. again in the light of the PIP process. It looks at first sight that they are tightening up on the 'live - still in compliance' part of the DS1500 process. I can see issues as you describe them, but more to do with the fact that we now have a third party interfering in what used to be a cut & dried GP to DWP direct process. The HP then will need to enter into a snail mail evidential paper based - paper chase, that's worrying lots of little, some, who may be local 'jobsworth's' properly doing their jobs (1) introducing delays that may run into weeks and (2) inadvertantly telling someone who was never intended to know potentially devastating and harmful information about their health status.

I'll have to read up on it .. .. again in the light of the PIP process, I don't like giving 'half-cocked' information and PIP delivery is still evolving and being refined.

NOTE: HP will be the new name for ATOS assessors, they have taken the word Care out of Health Care Professional .. .. I wonder why !
__________

20:30 update - #122 dori2o question,

- the GP's handbook hasn't been updated .. .. yes, the fee is still payable by the DWP direct to GP as it has always been!
- the whole point of the form was about dignity, yes it problematic as per the al-Megrahi case
- whilst unfettered money is at the centre of the DS1500 its the unfettering of money that removes additional stress

I can't see any further to the above 2 issues of delay and indiscretion coming out of PIP. I can't for example see any evidence that those in receipt for example of ESA/DS1500 would have their money stopped at week 26, or asked to repay it if they lived longer than week 27

schrodie

The PIP Guidance notes the DWP produced had a Working Example where a man was able to walk 100m albeit in discomfort but was awarded the 20m descriptor i.e. the enhanced rate!!

How does that work then?

dori2o

schrodie wrote: »

The PIP Guidance notes the DWP produced had a Working Example where a man was able to walk 100m albeit in discomfort but was awarded the 20m descriptor i.e. the enhanced rate!!

How does that work then?

Could this be because they were in severe discomfort from step 1 to step 'x'.

With DLA there is case law that states,

Commissioners Decision ref: R(DLA)4/04

Where the claimant suffered from a physical disablement which affected the physical act of walking and which caused the claimant severe discomfort even when not walking, then any walking which the claimant was able to accomplish despite the severe discomfort was to be disregarded.

I wonder if the same applies with PIP, which would suggest current caselaw might be brought across from earlier disability benefits into PIP.

rogerblack

schrodie wrote: »

The PIP Guidance notes the DWP produced had a Working Example where a man was able to walk 100m albeit in discomfort but was awarded the 20m descriptor i.e. the enhanced rate!!

Read the thread again.
From memory, this was due to him not being able to walk 100m repeatedly, so this descriptor not applying.

schrodie

The example is on page 76 Here

JS477

rogerblack wrote: »

From memory, this was due to him not being able to walk 100m repeatedly, so this descriptor not applying.

The example says that "walking 100m takes a lot out of him and for a few hours after he is unable to go more than a few steps without experiencing further severe hip pain."

So it seems then that if you can walk in some discomfort for 100m then cannot repeat this distance for some hours you then according to the example qualify for the E descriptor.

I suppose a question is is 100m the cut off distance for the repeatability test or what happens if you can manage 150m in some pain then cannot do that again for some hours, will you get descriptor E? In other words what's the unrepeatable distance you are allowed to walk and get descriptor E?

Also what happens if every step you take causes severe discomfort?

dori2o

They've made the system far far too complicated, and with complication comes the opportunity to claim what is not due.

How is thi system any better than the already tried, tested, and verified by way of case law, system that is in place for DLA, where you are either able to walk or unable/vrtually unable to walk?

So far the examples shouw you can walk, then can't, then can sometimes, but not other times........

If it's almost inpossible for ordinary, educated people to understand, how the hell are ATOS going to fare with it?

CTcelt1988

dori2o wrote: »

They've made the system far far too complicated, and with complication comes the opportunity to claim what is not due.

How is thi system any better than the already tried, tested, and verified by way of case law, system that is in place for DLA, where you are either able to walk or unable/vrtually unable to walk?

So far the examples shouw you can walk, then can't, then can sometimes, but not other times........

If it's almost inpossible for ordinary, educated people to understand, how the hell are ATOS going to fare with it?

And this Government say PIP will be easier to understand and won't be as complicated as DLA...

georgi72

Hi

I have a neurological problem which has left me with permanent drop foot left side for which I wear a leg brace and slight drop foot in the right which I dont wear anything. My brace causes me foot pain and i cannot wear it all the time although i do without exception when out.

Without it I can manage indoors (as I hold on to things) but cant walk far (probably 10-15 steps) without tripping or falling due to loss of balance. I also have painfull knees and hips.

I do not currently claim anything as with my brace on I can walk in excess of 200m and do indeed walk 250m to do the school run twice a day. Athough this at times is a big struggle but other days is a breeze.

Under PIP would I be able to claim the lower rate as I cannot walk in excess of 50m unaided or have I been told incorrectly?

I have only had this for about 14 months and its all new. Ive had to buy my own braces, cut my working hours down to 20 due to massive fatigue and whilst I appreciate I am still very lucky it would be nice for some help.

Thanks