PIP Mandatory Reconsideration timescale 10 April 2022 at 2:47AM edited 25 April 2022 at 4:20PM in Disability money matters 49 replies 3.1K views

Seeking_Advice_Please

And anyway, it is NOT the fact that people have posted comments unrelated to the request, but that they have picked apart helpful posts that DO relate to the original request, and have tried to dictate what information I am allowed to find helpful (saying more than once ''I don't know why you would find that helpful''), all the time changing the question to suit their answer! I have found many quoted responses directly challenging and negative and therefore extremely unhelpful!

Seeking_Advice_Please

I already have, but thanks! I find you very confrontational and I am surprised no one has commented before. Have a nice night.

Ginsipper007

poppy12345 said:

Ginsipper007 said:

poppy12345 said:

Seeking_Advice_Please said:

 they did not contact any of my relevant medical professionals

It's very rare they contact anyone. It's your responsibilty to send the evidence to support your claim. The same applies for the MR and Tribunal, if it gets that far. You need to make sure you send all relevant evidence. 

 PIP, under statute, is there to support folks to meet any additional costs that arise as a direct result of their disability.  This is the prime criteria, how much does your disability cost you (charges for therapy, cab fares, employing a cleaner, etc). 

I'm sorry but i disagree with this part. PIP isn't awarded because your disability costs you extra money. It's awarded if you meet the descriptors and score enough points needed for an award based on how your conditions affect you.

You can have a disability but not be entitled to PIP because if you don't meet the descriptors and score those points, there's no award. There are some out there that fall into this catagory. (and i'm not saying the OP does)

Not everyone has extra costs because of their disability.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you.  As a previous poster has already stated, appeals are successful when people are able to demonstrate that either the assessor has made a complete hash of it or if it's clear the decision doesn't comply with the law and won't stand up in tribunal - for which you need to quote the relevant Act/s, guidance, case law, etc.  Further, a different poster has also pointed out that the DWP routinely ignore what claimants write on their application forms, therefore, said claimants are always unable to meet descriptor criteria.

The bottom line, and there are no exceptions to this, is what issue does the Act of Parliament seek to redress - "PIP is non-means-tested and is intended to help with the extra costs arising from ill health or disability" (House of Commons Library).  If people are claiming PIP, but have no extra costs, then arguably they shouldn't be receiving it under the terms of the Act.  Point being, PIP isn't a payment simply because people have a disability, instead the descriptors are intended to allow the claimant to show how their disability impacts on them because, in the final analysis, this is what will determine whether they incur any 'extra costs arising from [their] ill health or disability'.  What I'm saying is that one has to understand the purpose of the criteria in order to be able to meet that criteria.  On that basis, I would encourage anyone who's putting in a request for an MR to not only think about what evidence has been made available to the DWP (and this can include providing names and addresses of appropriate professionals), but also, how the claim meets the standards for award under the Act.  

So, for anyone else turning up here, PIP is 'intended to help with the extra costs arising from [your] ill health or disability'.  From experience of multiple MRs, if you can show that you do have extra costs, then include this information.  Further, any PIP award will hinge on your ability to carry out tasks 'safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and within a reasonable time period', feel free to use that exact phrase (from the PIP blurb itself), because if you can't carry out tasks in such a way then you should meet the criteria for an award.

poppy12345

Ginsipper007 said:

poppy12345 said:

Ginsipper007 said:

poppy12345 said:

Seeking_Advice_Please said:

 they did not contact any of my relevant medical professionals

It's very rare they contact anyone. It's your responsibilty to send the evidence to support your claim. The same applies for the MR and Tribunal, if it gets that far. You need to make sure you send all relevant evidence. 

 PIP, under statute, is there to support folks to meet any additional costs that arise as a direct result of their disability.  This is the prime criteria, how much does your disability cost you (charges for therapy, cab fares, employing a cleaner, etc). 

I'm sorry but i disagree with this part. PIP isn't awarded because your disability costs you extra money. It's awarded if you meet the descriptors and score enough points needed for an award based on how your conditions affect you.

You can have a disability but not be entitled to PIP because if you don't meet the descriptors and score those points, there's no award. There are some out there that fall into this catagory. (and i'm not saying the OP does)

Not everyone has extra costs because of their disability.

  If people are claiming PIP, but have no extra costs, then arguably they shouldn't be receiving it under the terms of the Act.

I've never heard of such ridiculous nonesense. Do you have a link for this?

You can see the PIP handbook here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-fact-sheets/pip-handbook

PIP assessment guide here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-assessment-guide-for-assessment-providers/pip-assessment-guide-part-2-the-assessment-criteria

None of which mention anything about extra costs.

Spoonie_Turtle

(Sorry OP, I'm aware this thread has gone completely off-topic now.)

Ginsipper007 said:

poppy12345 said:

Ginsipper007 said:

poppy12345 said:

Seeking_Advice_Please said:

 they did not contact any of my relevant medical professionals

It's very rare they contact anyone. It's your responsibilty to send the evidence to support your claim. The same applies for the MR and Tribunal, if it gets that far. You need to make sure you send all relevant evidence. 

 PIP, under statute, is there to support folks to meet any additional costs that arise as a direct result of their disability.  This is the prime criteria, how much does your disability cost you (charges for therapy, cab fares, employing a cleaner, etc). 

I'm sorry but i disagree with this part. PIP isn't awarded because your disability costs you extra money. It's awarded if you meet the descriptors and score enough points needed for an award based on how your conditions affect you.

You can have a disability but not be entitled to PIP because if you don't meet the descriptors and score those points, there's no award. There are some out there that fall into this catagory. (and i'm not saying the OP does)

Not everyone has extra costs because of their disability.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you.  As a previous poster has already stated, appeals are successful when people are able to demonstrate that either the assessor has made a complete hash of it or if it's clear the decision doesn't comply with the law and won't stand up in tribunal - for which you need to quote the relevant Act/s, guidance, case law, etc.  Further, a different poster has also pointed out that the DWP routinely ignore what claimants write on their application forms, therefore, said claimants are always unable to meet descriptor criteria.

The bottom line, and there are no exceptions to this, is what issue does the Act of Parliament seek to redress - "PIP is non-means-tested and is intended to help with the extra costs arising from ill health or disability" (House of Commons Library).  If people are claiming PIP, but have no extra costs, then arguably they shouldn't be receiving it under the terms of the Act.  Point being, PIP isn't a payment simply because people have a disability, instead the descriptors are intended to allow the claimant to show how their disability impacts on them because, in the final analysis, this is what will determine whether they incur any 'extra costs arising from [their] ill health or disability'.  What I'm saying is that one has to understand the purpose of the criteria in order to be able to meet that criteria.  On that basis, I would encourage anyone who's putting in a request for an MR to not only think about what evidence has been made available to the DWP (and this can include providing names and addresses of appropriate professionals), but also, how the claim meets the standards for award under the Act.  

So, for anyone else turning up here, PIP is 'intended to help with the extra costs arising from [your] ill health or disability'.  From experience of multiple MRs, if you can show that you do have extra costs, then include this information.  Further, any PIP award will hinge on your ability to carry out tasks 'safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and within a reasonable time period', feel free to use that exact phrase (from the PIP blurb itself), because if you can't carry out tasks in such a way then you should meet the criteria for an award.

Exactly, which has nothing to do with actual costs incurred. 

Yes the intended purpose of PIP is to go towards extra costs associated with being disabled, but as it is not means-tested, dependent upon proof of extra costs, Nor is spending it held to account at all, realistically if one meets sufficient descriptors then one is entitled to it, regardless of one's actual living costs.

Plus people with very high care needs usually require extra funding (social care or direct payments, etc.) for carers / PAs on top of PIP anyway.

Meeting sufficient descriptors IS how a claim 'meets the standards for award under the Act'.  PIP decisions do not hinge on whether somebody is spending more money because they are disabled, they are determined purely on the descriptors set out in legislation, nothing else.

Granted, examples of real-life extra costs *may* be relevant, but only if they demonstrate functional limitation within the scope of activities assessed and give evidence of meeting at least one of the scoring descriptors.  And even then it has to be due to *need* rather than 'just' making life easier, which is a principle explicitly stated in the official guidance.

[I put 'just' in inverted commas because for PIP purposes making life easier/more comfortable is not a high enough threshold, but certainly in life it's important for disabled people to do that where we can.  Internalised ableism can make us hesitant to do so, but it's a harmful thing and should be ignored where possible!]

Alice_Holt

 The criteria for a PIP award is, as Spoonie states, "determined purely on the descriptors set out in legislation [and as interpreted by case law}".
 To the extent that those descriptors award points for needing aids and adaptions to preform the PIP activity reliably, there is recognition that the purpose of PIP is indeed to help with the additional costs that disability and illness may bring.  These aids can include a dosette box, a sock grabber, a perching stool, a shower seat, a walker, bathroom rails, raised toilet seat, to a walk-in shower and a motorised scooter. 

   However, purely the demonstration of extra spending by way of producing invoices would not (in itself) result in a PIP award. Conversely a report by an OT recommending the need for such aids is very useful evidence. 

   I have attended many PIP tribunals, and never once has a tribunal judge questioned (or cited as a reason in their SoR for not awarding PIP), the fact that a claimant is not paying any additional living costs.
For our Citizen Advice clients often trying to exist on a means tested benefit, that would be an wholly incorrect, inappropriate and inhuman test.            

  

Ginsipper007

poppy12345 said:

I've never heard of such ridiculous nonesense. Do you have a link for this?

You can see the PIP handbook here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-fact-sheets/pip-handbook

PIP assessment guide here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-assessment-guide-for-assessment-providers/pip-assessment-guide-part-2-the-assessment-criteria

None of which mention anything about extra costs.

Yes, please see the House of Commons (i.e. the actual government) documentation, as it clearly states, and as I've already said, "PIP is non-means-tested and is intended to help with the extra costs arising from ill health or disability" - https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/personal-independence-payments/

^^ Law -v- guidance, the former will always win out.

Please remain civil in your responses

Spoonie_Turtle

Ginsipper007 said:

poppy12345 said:

I've never heard of such ridiculous nonesense. Do you have a link for this?

You can see the PIP handbook here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-fact-sheets/pip-handbook

PIP assessment guide here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-assessment-guide-for-assessment-providers/pip-assessment-guide-part-2-the-assessment-criteria

None of which mention anything about extra costs.

Yes, please see the House of Commons (i.e. the actual government) documentation, as it clearly states, and as I've already said, "PIP is non-means-tested and is intended to help with the extra costs arising from ill health or disability" - https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/personal-independence-payments/

^^ Law -v- guidance, the former will always win out.

Please remain civil in your responses

Here is the law.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/5/part/4

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/377/part/2/made

I fail to find where extra costs are a criterion for any award.

poppy12345

Ginsipper007 said:

poppy12345 said:

I've never heard of such ridiculous nonesense. Do you have a link for this?

You can see the PIP handbook here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-fact-sheets/pip-handbook

PIP assessment guide here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-assessment-guide-for-assessment-providers/pip-assessment-guide-part-2-the-assessment-criteria

None of which mention anything about extra costs.

Yes, please see the House of Commons (i.e. the actual government) documentation, as it clearly states, and as I've already said, "PIP is non-means-tested and is intended to help with the extra costs arising from ill health or disability" - https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/personal-independence-payments/

^^ Law -v- guidance, the former will always win out.

Please remain civil in your responses

Please quote where exactly i haven't been civil. Disagreeing with you doesn't mean i'm not being civil. I will stand by what i said and the "criteria" you keep mentioning about the extra costs, doesn't actually exist.

I find it quite odd why you continue to quote my comments yet you disregard comments from other forumites that also disagree with your views.

You can see the law and guidance in the quotes above from myself and Spoonie.