PIP Tribunal and DWP response (confused!)

CakeCrusader

Alice_Holt wrote: »

"We've spoken to the GP who's said the DWP will get in touch with them and we don't need anything"
As poppy has said this is incorrect - you need to submit your own evidence to show why and how your son qualifies for PIP. < I thought it was wrong, I'll ask for the notes anyway as they see my kid for their mental health issues.

"Yes, from the law centre, who may or may not be able to attend the tribunal with us. They've said to let them know once the date comes through"
Hmm.
Slightly surprised by this. What our local Citizens Advice does is to take the client through the appeal process, help them understand the criteria for an award, review the DWP evidence bundle and together with the client write a submission explaining how and why the client should qualify for an award. < We went in and they have a copy of everything we have so far. They said to go back once we have a date for the Tribunal as it could take a year. They didn't say anything about the criteria, they saw the DWP bundle and pretty much shook their heads. They didn't say anything about a written submission so I'll chase this up.
The submission is focused on the relevant activities and descriptors, and as calcotti has said gives examples.
Clients are encouraged to have additional examples to tell the panel about at hearing, and expand on the points made in the submission.

Evidence can come from carers as well as medical professionals. In your case it would be useful to have evidence stating / showing his abilities have not improved since the previous award. < It's really just me, no one else can or will help. CAMHS rejected the referrals (twice), physio discharged, OT only covered handwriting so kido could use a laptop at school. I'll write a submission too as I do everything, not because I want to, but because the kido panics or just can't do something.
Well your law centre be doing this? Or is it up to you to send your statement to the tribunal? < I don't know. I'll get in touch with the Law Centre next week and ask.

Does the bundle include the previous assessments giving an award? There is some case law saying that a decision to end an award has to be very clear (and evidenced based) on why an award has been withdrawn. < Yes. They said my kido might improve and be more self sufficient. The last assessment notes said they'd overwritten the first assessment points awarded on the basis that kido could squeeze two fingers together, this was their basis of removing all of the points. Mobility was 0 because my kid had managed to get to the assessment. The fact that I took them and I sorted the timings out was ignored.
It is useful to give (very) brief comments on inconsistencies in the DWP bundle, but as calcotti says the main thrust of a submission (2 or 3 pages) needs to show why the descriptors apply. < I did this when we asked for the mandatory reconsideration, but they ignored the whole lot.

Are you you son's appointee? Or just his representative for the appeal? < appointee, I think. They send me everything that's sent to my adult kid.

Edit: Cross posted with your replies to poppy and calcotti

Thank you

Alice_Holt

"I did this when we asked for the mandatory reconsideration,..."

The MR will be in the submission bundle, so you can build on the points made (refer to page numbers), and quote any supporting evidence in the bundle (description of a typical day, perhaps), and give more examples to show why and how your son qualifies.


Are you you son's appointee? Or just his representative for the appeal? < appointee, I think.

This is important. If you are his appointee then you can attend the hearing and explain things (your son does not necessarily have to attend).
If only the rep, then a tribunal panel will expect your son to explain things at the tribunal himself. He needs to be present and take an active part - it is his verbal evidence that will be important to the panel. As a rep your role at a hearing is very much secondary to the claimant. Often, panels do not appreciate (or allow) reps trying (as it where) to explain for the claimant or to put words in their mouth - particularly if they do so without being invited to do so by the tribunal judge.
The rep can make the case through the written submission, at the hearing the panel mainly want to hear directly from the claimant. But note that the tribunal judge will often ask the rep for clarifications and to add comments (if the rep is indeed present at the hearing).

You do need to find out which you are.
Does any of the appeal paperwork refer to you as your son's appointee?

If just the rep, then you will need to explain on your submission and set the scene as to why the panel should allow you to speak up at the hearing to help them get a full picture of his condition / abilities.

I would have a chat to the law centre about this (or the TS directly).

If appointee, then it can be a tricky decision about whether it is sensible to have an adult claimant present. See below for some internal guidance within the TS itself:
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Practice+Directions/Tribunals/Childvulnerableadultandsensitivewitnesses.pdf
If you are his DWP appointee, and if you feel he would not cope at a tribunal (even with you as appointee doing the explaining), when asked a question by panel members - then this should be explained on the submission.

CakeCrusader

Alice_Holt wrote: »

"I did this when we asked for the mandatory reconsideration,..."

The MR will be in the submission bundle, so you can build on the points made (refer to page numbers), and quote any supporting evidence in the bundle (description of a typical day, perhaps), and give more examples to show why and how your son qualifies.


Are you you son's appointee? Or just his representative for the appeal? < appointee, I think. < absolutely appointee, I've just checked.

This is important. If you are his appointee then you can attend the hearing and explain things (your son does not necessarily have to attend).
If only the rep, then a tribunal panel will expect your son to explain things at the tribunal himself. He needs to be present and take an active part - it is his verbal evidence that will be important to the panel. As a rep your role at a hearing is very much secondary to the claimant. Often, panels do not appreciate (or allow) reps trying (as it where) to explain for the claimant or to put words in their mouth - particularly if they do so without being invited to do so by the tribunal judge.
The rep can make the case through the written submission, at the hearing the panel mainly want to hear directly from the claimant. But note that the tribunal judge will often ask the rep for clarifications and to add comments (if the rep is indeed present at the hearing).

You do need to find out which you are.
Does any of the appeal paperwork refer to you as your son's appointee?

If just the rep, then you will need to explain on your submission and set the scene as to why the panel should allow you to speak up at the hearing to help them get a full picture of his condition / abilities.

I would have a chat to the law centre about this (or the TS directly).

If appointee, then it can be a tricky decision about whether it is sensible to have an adult claimant present. See below for some internal guidance within the TS itself:
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Practice+Directions/Tribunals/Childvulnerableadultandsensitivewitnesses.pdf
If you are his DWP appointee, and if you feel he would not cope at a tribunal (even with you as appointee doing the explaining), when asked a question by panel members - then this should be explained on the submission.

Ok, thank you. I think kido would be terrified, they get really anxious, they stammer, and I'd need to rephrase a lot of the questions. They get confused and anxious when I ask them what they'd like to eat so a tribunal might be a bit too much, then again they might want to try.

Alice_Holt

CakeCrusader wrote: »

Ok, thank you. I think kido would be terrified, they get really anxious, they stammer, and I'd need to rephrase a lot of the questions. They get confused and anxious when I ask them what they'd like to eat so a tribunal might be a bit too much, then again they might want to try.

So, that's another point to put on the submission, and may explain why he (perhaps) didn't manage to convey fully his difficulties to an ATOS / Capita HCP in 20-30 mins at the last assessment (!).

CakeCrusader

Alice_Holt wrote: »

So, that's another point to put on the submission, and may explain why he (perhaps) didn't manage to convey fully his difficulties to an ATOS / Capita HCP in 20-30 mins at the last assessment (!).

I did that in the mandatory consideration. The assessor said kido had good eye contact, was clear, didn't ask for clarification etc. It was as though she was sitting in a completely different assessment, none of it was true. Kido was "well kept" (kido hadn't washed for 6 months and had matted hair).

Alice_Holt

CakeCrusader wrote: »

I did that in the mandatory consideration.

Good.

Are you aiming for an enhanced award?

It's not that uncommon to go from 0 points at assessment to enhanced at tribunal. This week a client of ours who scored no points at a dreadful assessment was awarded both enhanced DL and Mob at the hearing. Rather illustrative of the appalling assessment system (as is your case).

CakeCrusader

Alice_Holt wrote: »

Good.

Are you aiming for an enhanced award?

It's not that uncommon to go from 0 points at assessment to enhanced at tribunal. This week a client of ours who scored no points at a dreadful assessment was awarded both enhanced DL and Mob at the hearing. Rather illustrative of the appalling assessment system (as is your case).

Not really, just something that's fair (the mobility element would be amazing considering the kido can't walk more than a few meters and has absolutely zero ability to plan a route but kido's just happy with what they are given). The system's awful. It's not like people choose to be disabled or sick, yet they are punished for it. If the tribunal do award something and we have to go through this again in 18 months time I just might flip!!

calcotti

CakeCrusader wrote: »

If the tribunal do award something and we have to go through this again in 18 months time I just might flip!!

The length of the award will reflect the tribunal’s view of whether his condition is likely to change. Although the PIP award is based on the impact of illness rather than the diagnosis itself the diagnosis/cause of the health conditions may impact the likelihood of improvement. If you have any medical letters that discuss prognosis or progression make sure these are provided. If such evidence has already been provided it would be worth drawing the tribunal’s attention to it.

However it can of course be difficult to predict future health and new treatments may become available.

CakeCrusader

calcotti wrote: »

The length of the award will reflect the tribunal’s view of whether his condition is likely to change. Although the PIP award is based on the impact of illness rather than the diagnosis itself the diagnosis/cause of the health conditions may impact the likelihood of improvement. If you have any medical letters that discuss prognosis or progression make sure these are provided. If such evidence has already been provided it would be worth drawing the tribunal’s attention to it.

However it can of course be difficult to predict future health and new treatments may become available.

Given that the conditions have been like this since kido was 8 and they are now 20 I don't think they will get any better. We're looking at ways to make life easier but it's slow going (since the mental health issues took hold), can now use the microwave to cook a frozen pizza if told how long to cook it for. We weren't sent anything from the physio so have nothing to show they discharged them (I'll contact PALS on Monday). I really, really do wish there was some sort of treatment for the conditions, I'd much rather have a happy kid who's engaging with life and is independent.

Alice_Holt

CakeCrusader wrote: »

... if we have to go through this again in 18 months time I just might flip!!

And the stress would (presumably) worsen your son's condition.

Put this on the submission. Explain the condition will not improve (per calcotti) nor or his coping mechanisms and that if exposed to this again your son would struggle to cope, it would worsen his condition, etc and ask for a long award reflecting the nature of the condition.


"can now use the microwave to cook a frozen pizza if told how long to cook it for."
Emphasis this bit (rather than use of a microwave) as this indicates 1e is appropriate rather than 1c

"1. Preparing food.
a. Can prepare and cook a simple meal unaided. 0 points.
b. Needs to use an aid or appliance to be able to either prepare or cook a simple meal. 2 points.
c. Cannot cook a simple meal using a conventional cooker but is able to do so using a microwave. points. 2 points
d. Needs prompting to be able to either prepare or cook a simple meal. 2 points.
e. Needs supervision or assistance to either prepare or cook a simple meal. 4 points."