Do I tell DWP ?

50Twuncle

FBaby wrote: »

Unbelievable! So you can walk twice 100 yards 3 times a week, reliably, but you want them to believe that you can't do that to the point of requesting a home visit or going with a wheelchair when you don't actually need to?

You are asking if they can find out about your work because you know that if they do, they could indeed refute what you are telling them?

How do I get from the carpark (1/4 mile away from the centre) to the office itself ?
There is parking on the road outside - but the spaces are normally used - so what do I do if I turn up and find no spaces ?
Park in the car park - 1/4 mile away, across a busy road !
Hence - YES I would need my wheelchair - but this does not fit in the doorways of the house - hence the reason for requesting a home assessment - OK ?

rockingbilly

wellynever wrote: »

This is where people never seem to understand,

ok lets say I have a job 3 days a week I drive there and have to be there for 8.30am I also have to walk 100 yards in my mind I've made it to work, but to walk the 100 yards it would take me over a hour have to keep stopping and be in a lot of pain but in in my mind I've walked 100 yards and got to work on time,

But In the minds of the assessor and the DWP I'm not able to walk 100 yards.

See it's easy for people to judge.

In my mind I can do lots of things but my doctor the assessor and DWP know I'm unable to do the things.

Edit to add, In my mind I made it to work reliably and on time but for some strange reason the assessor and the DWP didn't take my mind into consideration funny old world we live in.

So what you are saying is that even though you manage to walk the 100 metres the DWP would say that you haven't because it took an hour to complete the task?
I can see where you are coming from, but if I told the assessor/DWP that I can walk at least a 100 metres what do you thing they would adjudge from that statement. I would not be able to prove how painful it was or even how long it took me.
Surely doesn't this depend on the individual's strength of character as well and will power?

I have reports that say that I can walk 10 metres and 20 metres is out of the question, yet in all honesty I can physically walk more than a 100 metres - I have to as I would get nowhere.
Like the OP they know that they have to walk 100 metres otherwise they would not get to work - that is the goal. Most people would strive to get to that goal - will power and determination can overcome most if not all physical difficulties.
As an example - if you have run out of milk and need a cup of tea. You know that the nearest shop is 250 metres away. What do you do, try and get someone to go and get it for you or would you put your coat on and find the strength to do the thing yourself. I know what I would do and not worry about how I will be when I get back home.

poppy12345

TheNickster wrote: »

In this case there was no lie. It would only be a lie if (s)he is specifically asked if they are working and they said they were not when in fact they were. (S)he has not even applied yet.

If what they were trying to get was difficult to get because those that decide whether they get it or not has a reputation for making arbitrary and perverse decisions then it is understandable(though perhaps unwise) that an application may be tempted not to disclose what they have not been specifically asked to disclose.

Even if they did lie what should be the overriding factor is whether the medical evidence shows that doing the activity that has been lied about will have an ongoing detrimental effect on their condition.

On a separate point making the assessment interview room more than 20m from the waiting room smacks of entrapment and just because an applicant can walk it once or twice is no reason for an automatic rejection and then put through the additional stress of an appeal. Also there is no consistency between assessment centres - some are more than 20metres and some less - another post code lottery.

Of course accurate rejection of those applicants who are not entitled is important but so are those rejected unfairly.

I never once metioned the origninal poster of this thread lied. What i actually said was "when SOMEONE has lied"

rockingbilly

50Twuncle wrote: »

This is the problem - By not giving them the information, when they don't ask - is that wrong ?
Surely - it is up to them to ask me ?
If they do ask - then obviously I will tell them .....

But no doubt you would be complaining if the assessor fails to ask or expand on how your difficulties affect your life. I presume based on what you are saying that it is OK if the assessor doesn't bring something up that you believe that they should?

rockingbilly

TheNickster wrote: »

On a separate point making the assessment interview room more than 20m from the waiting room smacks of entrapment and just because an applicant can walk it once or twice is no reason for an automatic rejection and then put through the additional stress of an appeal. Also there is no consistency between assessment centres - some are more than 20metres and some less - another post code lottery.

Of course accurate rejection of those applicants who are not entitled is important but so are those rejected unfairly.

Of course there is entrapment - the assessment would not work for the DWP if that wasn't present. It's also entrapment when the assessor asks 'how far can you walk in one minute'. To get the enhanced rate the time walked is measured in seconds not minutes. It's also entrapment when the assessor fails to ask questions that they know could result in points being awarded.
Entrapment and the DWP go hand in hand always have and always will. You only have to look at the many forms that they have that have questions designed to elicit an answer that would more than likely cause a refusal of help.

wellynever

rockingbilly wrote: »

So do I
I doubt very much that if a claimant tells both the assessor and the DWP that they have no problem with walking at least 100 metres that they would be awarded Enhanced Mobility.
The limit is 20 metres

You need to re read what I posted, I could walk 100 yards but it would take days, I got the HRM because I'm unable to walk 10 metres,

I was trying to point out that people do not know the person who is posting or how a illness or disability affects them day to day,

I might go and do the London marathon next year, it will never happen, but just by typing it people on here might think I will,

It's to easy to judge people.

FBaby

You can sugar coated as you wish, you can't take away the question in your first post, and that is whether you should inform them that you work because you know that by doing so, it might be providing the evidence that you don't want them to know about so you can claim the highest element of mobility. You asking whether they would found out anyway says it all!

There is parking on the road outside - but the spaces are normally used - so what do I do if I turn up and find no spaces ?

Because of course, in this instance, requesting to have parking access is not the most logical request!

In this case there was no lie. It would only be a lie if (s)he is specifically asked if they are working and they said they were not when in fact they were. (S)he has not even applied yet.

Ha the famous 'I'm not lying if I'm just omitting'. Even my kids know better!

Confuseddot

wellynever wrote: »

You need to re read what I posted, I could walk 100 yards but it would take days, I got the HRM because I'm unable to walk 10 metres,

I was trying to point out that people do not know the person who is posting or how a illness or disability affects them day to day,

I might go and do the London marathon next year, it will never happen, but just by typing it people on here might think I will,

It's to easy to judge people.

You wrote that you can walk 100 yards reliably, not sure how reliable you are if it takes an hour to walk it.

50Twuncle

FBaby wrote: »

Because of course, in this instance, requesting to have parking access is not the most logical request

That is correct - the road is a public place ( no car park) - and not "bookable"

wellynever

TheNickster wrote: »

If it always takes a an hour to walk 100 yards then you can say 'reliably' - ie he can say "I can reliable walk 100 yards in an hour.

That is why the other factors come in to play:- safely, in a timely maner, repeatedly etc.

That is why you can infer little from just using the word 'reliably. It is the context that is important.

Thanks this is exactly what I meant but the DWP do not see it that way, people are quick to jump in,

in my mind I can climb stairs, but in the mind of the DWP crawling up the stairs and taking all day is not satisfactory.

See how easy people jump to conclusions.