Atos assessment for PIP, I know they are gonna trick me but how?

rockingbilly

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

So if you can only do it once and then have to go to bed for three days, you answer no.

.

Should that not read: answer yes I can carry out that activity, but if in doing so I would have to go to bed for three days to recover?

seven-day-weekend

rockingbilly wrote: »

Should that not read: answer yes I can carry out that activity, but if in doing so I would have to go to bed for three days to recover?

Not if you can only answer yes or no, as someone has said further up the thread.

poppy12345

rockingbilly wrote: »

Should that not read: answer yes I can carry out that activity, but if in doing so I would have to go to bed for three days to recover?

No it shouldn't because if a person can't something reliably, in a timely fashion, [FONT=&quot]Repeatedly[/FONT] and safely it means you can't do it, which is the criteria for PIP.

NeilCr

So

To summarise

Rockingbilly has had no F2F medical contact re DLA/PIP since 2001. He had an AA assessment this year which he failed (miserably by the sound of it).

OP. Worth considering when you read his advice/comments on a thread on PIP

rockingbilly

poppy12345 wrote: »

No it shouldn't because if a person can't something reliably, in a timely fashion, [FONT=&quot]Repeatedly[/FONT] and safely it means you can't do it, which is the criteria for PIP.

I don't agree, what you are doing is not telling the truth.

If someone said to me 'Could I walk 100 metres?' The answer is yes I could BUT taking into account the factors you mentioned I would be in bed for 3 days if I did.
So based on that the law says that I should be treated as unable to carry out that activity.
The only reason I am picking up on this is because the Jobcentre guy who filled out the PIP2 put it down as I could do everything BUT then explained what would happen if I did it.
Your version is actually bypassing everything - it should be the truthful answer then offer the reason what would happen if you did do the activity.

By saying no actually means you are saying that even if you attempted the activity it would be impossible to start the activity. Saying yes would mean that you can start the activity BUT you would not be able to carry it out reliably, safely and in a reasonable time.

rockingbilly

rockingbilly wrote: »

I don't agree, what you are doing is not telling the truth.

If someone said to me 'Could I walk 100 metres?' The answer is yes I could BUT taking into account the factors you mentioned I would be in bed for 3 days if I did.
So based on that the law says that I should be treated as unable to carry out that activity.

Your version is actually bypassing everything - it should be the truthful answer then offer the reason what would happen if you did do the activity.

By saying no actually means you are saying that even if you attempted the activity it would be impossible to start the activity. Saying yes would mean that you can start the activity BUT you would not be able to carry it out reliably, safely and in a reasonable time.

Double Posting

rockingbilly

NeilCr wrote: »

So

. He had an AA assessment this year which he failed (miserably by the sound of it).

As do most AA applicants - fail miserably.

Mind you I do have experience of my wife's AA claim. She had her AA1 form filled out by the Welfare Rights (Social Services) after they came out to assess her.
She never had a F2F, the DWP wrote to the social worker who told them all about the difficulties my wife had and what equipment had been supplied.

She was awarded the day and night rate indefinitely - so yes in some cases you can get a good result.

rockingbilly

Penitent wrote: »

You told us you didn't have a F2F for PIP, they made the decision based on your forms.

So 12 successful + 1 failure (for AA) = 13.



So you didn't have "approx. 12 F2F assessments all of which resulted in substantial awards being made", you had 13 assessments most of which resulted in awards.

Ah now I understand what you are meaning. I was treating the DLA - PIP conversion as one. You are right there was no F2F.

Yes it should be 13 actual F2F assessments of which 12 were successful. The one that got away was the AA one

That's an even better result 12 out of 13 with 1 non starter.
I have not included the DLA - PIP conversion as it doesn't count for anything (No F2F assessment)
was confused sorry.

poppy12345

rockingbilly wrote: »

I don't agree, what you are doing is not telling the truth.

If someone said to me 'Could I walk 100 metres?' The answer is yes I could BUT taking into account the factors you mentioned I would be in bed for 3 days if I did.
So based on that the law says that I should be treated as unable to carry out that activity.
The only reason I am picking up on this is because the Jobcentre guy who filled out the PIP2 put it down as I could do everything BUT then explained what would happen if I did it.
Your version is actually bypassing everything - it should be the truthful answer then offer the reason what would happen if you did do the activity.

By saying no actually means you are saying that even if you attempted the activity it would be impossible to start the activity. Saying yes would mean that you can start the activity BUT you would not be able to carry it out reliably, safely and in a reasonable time.

I really couldn't care if you don't agree! This is the PIP criteria and i wasn't the one who set that. I'm only telling you what the criteria is...

rockingbilly

poppy12345 wrote: »

I really couldn't care if you don't agree! This is the PIP criteria and i wasn't the one who set that. I'm only telling you what the criteria is...

I'm not arguing about the criteria, all of that I accept and understand.
What I am saying is that the criteria comes AFTER the answer, not before it.

I know I am splitting hairs, but surely you should tell them if you could start the activity but them tell them what would happen after - fall, take too long, stop due to breathlessness etc.

To say point blank that you could not even start the activity is wrong.

I suspect I know the reason why you say no as it would be likely that the assessor or DWP would just see the word yes and read no more. Thus coming to the wrong conclusion. If I am right isn't that manipulating it?