UC LCWRA appeal

tifo

born_again said:

But how does your eye affect the pip descriptors?

As has been said. Pip is not based on conditions, only how they effect your daily life fitting into the descriptors.

This is for LCWRA, being able to work  ..... In terms of PIP there's the help with medicines that they gave 2 points for but it's mobility and engaging with others for the majority of points. Some other descriptors for minimum points. In this regard they (tribunal) didn't believe me and took the assessors view.

poppy12345

tifo said:

born_again said:

But how does your eye affect the pip descriptors?

As has been said. Pip is not based on conditions, only how they effect your daily life fitting into the descriptors.

This is for LCWRA, being able to work  ..... In terms of PIP there's the help with medicines that they gave 2 points for but it's mobility and engaging with others for the majority of points. Some other descriptors for minimum points. In this regard they (tribunal) didn't believe me and took the assessors view.

Which descriptor do you think applie to you? You must be aware by now that LCWRA is about the work you can do and not the work you can't do.

For PIP managing therapy and monitoring a health condition.. manage therapeutic activities that are carried out in a domestic setting that are prescribed or recommended by a registered doctor, nurse, pharmacist or health professional regulated by the Health Professions Council;

Without any of which their health is likely to deteriorate.

This activity only applies to medication or therapy delivered in the home environment i.e. where the claimant lives (and may include care homes). Whether you can score points here will depend what therapy you do at home.

I still think you're focusing on something that's not possible to achieve, challenging the decision of the Tribunal. You've already been told that they don't think an error in law has occured. Several people have advised to start a new claim for PIP if you sdtill think you qualify and here we are 15 pages in on this thread alone.

born_again

tifo said:

born_again said:

But how does your eye affect the pip descriptors?

As has been said. Pip is not based on conditions, only how they effect your daily life fitting into the descriptors.

This is for LCWRA, being able to work  ..... In terms of PIP there's the help with medicines that they gave 2 points for but it's mobility and engaging with others for the majority of points. Some other descriptors for minimum points. In this regard they (tribunal) didn't believe me and took the assessors view.

Apologies. This was in the wrong thread, sadly easy given the 2. 

poppy12345

born_again said:

tifo said:

born_again said:

But how does your eye affect the pip descriptors?

As has been said. Pip is not based on conditions, only how they effect your daily life fitting into the descriptors.

This is for LCWRA, being able to work  ..... In terms of PIP there's the help with medicines that they gave 2 points for but it's mobility and engaging with others for the majority of points. Some other descriptors for minimum points. In this regard they (tribunal) didn't believe me and took the assessors view.

  This was in the wrong thread, sadly easy given the 2. 

Agree with that. Both threads have totally confused me!

Muttleythefrog

tifo said:

born_again said:

But how does your eye affect the pip descriptors?

As has been said. Pip is not based on conditions, only how they effect your daily life fitting into the descriptors.

This is for LCWRA, being able to work  ..... In terms of PIP there's the help with medicines that they gave 2 points for but it's mobility and engaging with others for the majority of points. Some other descriptors for minimum points. In this regard they (tribunal) didn't believe me and took the assessors view.

It looks like a very painful condition... I can certainly understand why you say you'd not be able to work the majority of the time or similar. However while the headline assessment is a Work Capability Assessment as you know it is a disability descriptor determined outcome... as it is with different criteria and descriptors for PIP. They look at the effect of illness, injury and disability on ability to perform activities.

I must admit I'm still confused as to specifically why you got awarded LCW as you keep referring to the points scored and risk.. the points scored seem insufficient so I assume you triggered non functional descriptor regarding risk to your health should you not be found to have limited capability for work. If so, or otherwise, clarity might help. But you still as yet don't seem to indicate what LCWRA descriptor either functional or the special non functional that you think should have applied and unfortunately you seem to revert back to generic description which is taking things around in circles. It's further getting confusing because for PIP there also seems a circular debate.

I wonder if at tribunal and possibly in paperwork/assessments there exists a similar underlying issue and pattern in that there is no conclusion, limited relevance or direction to what is engaged and the processes in that respect may be failing you..... is this possible? I've seen it with some some other claimants who have ended up on these boards... there's no apparent intellectual or communication barrier to answering questions but there seems to be some emotional evasion to doing so and that I imagine can come across as someone being deceitful (you seem to report decent experiences of events where participants go on to conclude they do not believe you) ... especially if they try to take you around an issue rather than simply engaging it and where the answers should be quite factual. 

You're getting some good advice here but I think focus is necessary on the battles you can win. Focus absolutely on what the activities and descriptors are... not what you wish them to be or imagine they should be... and consider that in a test of balance of evidence the testimony you give (on paper or otherwise) should be straightforward and methodical, with real examples, and a natural flow to conclusion you hope others (decision maker, assessor, tribunal panel) to reach.

HillStreetBlues

Muttleythefrog said:

 I've seen it with some some other claimants who have ended up on these boards... there's no apparent intellectual or communication barrier to answering questions but there seems to be some emotional evasion to doing so and that I imagine can come across as someone being deceitful (you seem to report decent experiences of events where participants go on to conclude they do not believe you) ... especially if they try to take you around an issue rather than simply engaging it and where the answers should be quite factual.

The OP  has said in the other thread about an tribunal appeal for DLA "They too didn't believe me much"
For whatever reason there does seem to be a pattern.

I agree with you that answers should be factual, how you answer them is also important (don't get angry, defensive etc). 
 

poppy12345

HillStreetBlues said:

Muttleythefrog said:

 I've seen it with some some other claimants who have ended up on these boards... there's no apparent intellectual or communication barrier to answering questions but there seems to be some emotional evasion to doing so and that I imagine can come across as someone being deceitful (you seem to report decent experiences of events where participants go on to conclude they do not believe you) ... especially if they try to take you around an issue rather than simply engaging it and where the answers should be quite factual.

The OP  has said in the other thread about an tribunal appeal for DLA "They too didn't believe me much"
For whatever reason there does seem to be a pattern.

Their other thread is regarding a PIP claim, not DLA. However, this thread is now 15 pages and the other thread is 17 pages and we are still going round in circles.

xxxxxxxx

tifo said:

Please see above. The left eye is much smaller now as it's deflating from the start of the conditions in 2018.

The hospital have photos of my eye in 2019 which will show it not only open with the inflammation but internal as well. I was going to ask for them for any appeal.

None of which meets any LCWRA descriptor.

I suggest you think very carefully before asking for a new health assessment.  You  could be found capable for work.  You will be lucky to get another judge put you in LCW. 

HillStreetBlues

poppy12345 said:

Their other thread is regarding a PIP claim, not DLA.

Yes it is, but in the thread the OP referenced a tribunal regarding DLA. (easy mistake as it is a long thread and can be missed).

Muttleythefrog

HillStreetBlues said:

Muttleythefrog said:

 I've seen it with some some other claimants who have ended up on these boards... there's no apparent intellectual or communication barrier to answering questions but there seems to be some emotional evasion to doing so and that I imagine can come across as someone being deceitful (you seem to report decent experiences of events where participants go on to conclude they do not believe you) ... especially if they try to take you around an issue rather than simply engaging it and where the answers should be quite factual.

The OP  has said in the other thread about an tribunal appeal for DLA "They too didn't believe me much"
For whatever reason there does seem to be a pattern.

I agree with you that answers should be factual, how you answer them is also important (don't get angry, defensive etc). 
 

Or was it me that said that...lol... now it is all getting confusing haha.