PIP ending letter

GlasweJen

Oh and my award is for 3 years, when exactly do they expect me to regrow the dead nerves to my legs?

Alice_Holt

Very frustrating.
The necessary use of a dossette box should be 1 point.
Needs supervision or prompting to be able to wash or bathe. 2 points
Needs to use an aid or appliance to be able to dress or undress. 2 points

Any additional errors that would get to enhanced DL?
What did the tribunal award you?

Would it be possible to get a GP's letter stating that your condition has not improved since the DWP's decision date relating to the tribunal?
You could then send this with a copy of the TS decision letter.
Along with a written statement from the carer / family member who supervises / provides care; plus any additional medical evidence.
The PIP assessment guide may be worth quoting - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/547146/pip-assessment-guide.pdf

(But, I'm sure you know all this, GlasweJen).

I'd be inclined to give the MR as much clout as possible (even if it takes a couple of weeks to assemble the evidence), in the hope that yours is one of the 20% where the DWP do take a more sensible look at it. If only to (hopefully) avoid the longer wait for a TS hearing.

Would it be worth writing to your MP - along the lines of it being a complete waste of public money for you to have to take this decision to tribunal again when you had a favourable decision 15 months ago and your condition has not improved.....etc.....etc.... And enclosing the MR asking if the MP can contact the DWP to ensure that the decision is thoroughly and competently reviewed...etc...

Best wishes.

GlasweJen

Alice_Holt wrote: »

Very frustrating.
The necessary use of a dossette box should be 1 point.
Needs supervision or prompting to be able to wash or bathe. 2 points
Needs to use an aid or appliance to be able to dress or undress. 2 points
Any additional errors that would get to enhanced DL?

The DM wrote that I don't need help eating because I use normal cutlery but hasn't mentioned that I use unbreakavle plates and lidded cups.

They've also missed the fact that I need things in larger print and uncrowded text because I have constant double vision. Apparently my VA was normal with one eye closed, well yes it would be but I can't walk about with a patch over my eye, one I would lose a good chunk of my visual field and two I risk adult onset amblyopia (had an amblyopic eye as a child) and if I then have an accident that damages the good eye I get to be blind on top of all of this!

What did the tribunal award you?
enhanced mobility with standard care but my eyes were better controlled and I wasn't on oxygen or needing as much medication support at that point.

Would it be possible to get a GP's letter stating that your condition has not improved since the DWP's decision date relating to the tribunal?

My GP doesn't write letters for anyone, they only do a report if the DWP ask for it.
You could then send this with a copy of the TS decision letter.
Along with a written statement from the carer / family member who supervises / provides care; plus any additional medical evidence.
The PIP assessment guide may be worth quoting - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/547146/pip-assessment-guide.pdf
I sent a letter from my cardiologist that actually contained the line "...and is so brittle that it affects her ability to carry out day to day tasks including [cut] and bathing which required constant supervision, the availability of an emergency hoist and help to ensure her lower half is dry".
(But, I'm sure you know all this, GlasweJen).

I'd be inclined to give the MR as much clout as possible (even if it takes a couple of weeks to assemble the evidence), in the hope that yours is one of the 20% where the DWP do take a more sensible look at it. If only to (hopefully) avoid the longer wait for a TS hearing.

Would it be worth writing to your MP - along the lines of it being a complete waste of public money for you to have to take this decision to tribunal again when you had a favourable decision 15 months ago and your condition has not improved.....etc.....etc.... And enclosing the MR asking if the MP can contact the DWP to ensure that the decision is thoroughly and competently reviewed...etc... My MP is already on side, I'm going to write to her aide on Monday and give him an update. Can't wait to read the assessment report. I'm seriously considering sending the assessment centre some leaflets about brain injuries.

Best wishes.

Thanks Alice

GlasweJen

Reading the DMs rationale for not awarding points they've stated "you can read with one eye closed, you use blue acetate overlays to read information".

The blue acetate overlays are a prescription item, shouldn't they count as an aid?

Alice_Holt

GlasweJen wrote: »

The blue acetate overlays are a prescription item, shouldn't they count as an aid?

Yes they should.

From the PIP assessment guide:
"When considering whether a claimant requires an aid or appliance, HPs should distinguish between:
• an aid or appliance that a claimant must use or could reasonably be expected to use, in order to carry out the activity safely, reliably, repeatedly and in a timely manner; and
• an aid or appliance that a claimant may be using or wish to use because it makes it easier to carry out the activity safely, reliably, repeatedly and in a timely manner.
Descriptor advice in favour of an aid or appliance should only be given in the former case."

At my CAB, a LTT ruled that one client we were helping with an appeal who needed an overlay to overcome his dyslexia should be awarded points for the reading activity. The use of the overlay was recommended by a tutor at his local college (where he was doing a course) and we had evidence documenting this, but it was not prescribed by the GP.
The TS decision was not challenged by the DWP.
(I think this client also needed some sort of PC screen / adaption as well - do you need this in addition?) .

GlasweJen

Alice_Holt wrote: »

Yes they should.

From the PIP assessment guide:
"When considering whether a claimant requires an aid or appliance, HPs should distinguish between:
• an aid or appliance that a claimant must use or could reasonably be expected to use, in order to carry out the activity safely, reliably, repeatedly and in a timely manner; and
• an aid or appliance that a claimant may be using or wish to use because it makes it easier to carry out the activity safely, reliably, repeatedly and in a timely manner.
Descriptor advice in favour of an aid or appliance should only be given in the former case."

At my CAB, a LTT ruled that one client we were helping with an appeal who needed an overlay to overcome his dyslexia should be awarded points for the reading activity. The use of the overlay was recommended by a tutor at his local college (where he was doing a course) and we had evidence documenting this, but it was not prescribed by the GP.
The TS decision was not challenged by the DWP.
(I think this client also needed some sort of PC screen / adaption as well - do you need this in addition?) .

I have a programme that changes the colours on the screen but I prefer to use the screen reader. I mentioned the acetates but not the computer programme on my application but the nurse did ask me about it in detail and I told her the name of the programme and the name of the screen reading software.

GlasweJen

I'm looking for a framework on which to base my mandatory reconsideration.

I have been awarded 4 points for "requiring supervision to prepare a meal", now I don't see how supervision can help if I black out except to remove me from harms way and phone an ambulance if I spill a pot of boiling water down myself and I feel that I should be considered as unable to prepare a meal at all (which is more like the reality, I don't cook at all).

But even if 1e is correct, by acknowledging that I require supervision to cook and to carry out a journey (DM wrote this but didn't award points which is a moot point anyway as I get enhanced on the moving grounds) shouldn't I then be considered to require supervision constantly and therefore score under all of the "supervision" tasks?

What's put this in my mind is the tribunal ruling below. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/58d3ad36e5274a16e3000090/CPIP_1599_2016-01.pdf

I definitely need supervision in the shower (awarded 4 points by previous tribunal) and occasionally need help toileting as going to the toilet can induce a blackout for me (once a month or so).

I was always awarded DLA on the grounds that I needed constantly supervised, a fact that not many people would dispute so why do the DWP now say that I only need supervised to cook and get around but not to bathe, toilet, manage medication and therapy etc?