Am I able to claim the mobility side of PIP?

Muttleythefrog

peteuk said:

HillStreetBlues said:

peteuk said:

Your Pip assessment would have covered mobility, so you have already been assessed for it.  Some would argue that having a drivers license gives you the capacity to plan a route and so will discount the mobility section (It was still happening in 2022).

The threshold for not leaving the house is high, and will need hard evidence to back it up.

The risk as you point out is you will have a full assessment and losing your award,

I disagree.
Learning to drive and taking a test a person will always be accompanied by another person.
To get any award you do not need "hard evidence" but the more supporting evidence a person has will help.

I am only going by experience and what I was taught, either during initial training or through mentored assessments. 

Ive seen a drivers license/use of car used for many activities. 

For OPD - the threshold is high and it does need hard evidence, because of the high threshold.  For instance if the OP can  take medication prescribed by GP and leave the house then its not OPD, but if there is consultant letters, mix of medication tried etc then your more likely to get OPD proven.

Please don't get me wrong, I totally agree that the drivers license is wrong, but Id rather people know what they are up against.   

Yes you give time to time some glimpse into the flaws of assessments and the long understood failing of assessors. This example falls into a similar category of one of mine regarding managing budgeting decisions 'can manage complex budgeting decisions as attended mainstream school and university' while failed to explain the relevance or note education had not been attended for over 20 years (and they described my evidence as not recent!) A paper based assessor at a later review came to a different judgement and agreed with me.

Fortunately as others point out getting an award may significantly be determined by the assessor's report but that is not the end.

Not quite sure what to advise in this case. I think they need extra support as someone not knowing what their PIP award detail has been would suggest to me they may lack for ability or stamina to engage the processes of claim to a high level in their own interest. However... I would look at when next review date is and consider if that is the time to make a stronger case for applicable descriptors including for mobility... or if a more dramatic effort to get a different award is sensible. Hard to say. I do think it is important to raise a point you do that they have in effect already been assessed for mobility as they may be under impression there are two different types of PIP that you separately apply for... but how accurately they have been assessed I do wonder and whether challenging decision should have happened... well... the system fails so many disabled people...can say little more.

peteuk

Spoonie_Turtle said:

HillStreetBlues said:

peteuk said:

I am only going by experience and what I was taught, either during initial training or through mentored assessments. 

Ive seen a drivers license/use of car used for many activities. 

For OPD - the threshold is high and it does need hard evidence, because of the high threshold.  For instance if the OP can  take medication prescribed by GP and leave the house then its not OPD, but if there is consultant letters, mix of medication tried etc then your more likely to get OPD proven.

Please don't get me wrong, I totally agree that the drivers license is wrong, but Id rather people know what they are up against.   

I do feel you need to make it clear that you talking about how a "assessment" might work, in case you put someone off from claiming.

Completely agree.  What you are talking about peteuk is the initial assessment, not whether they could actually be entitled to PIP according to the actual criteria.  While it's good to prepare people, the way you word it makes it sound like they wouldn't be entitled to PIP rather than you warning of the outcome of the assessment - which is often totally irrelevant to whether someone is actually entitled to PIP.

Thankfully assessors are 'only' the initial gatekeepers not the ultimate arbiters of whether people get an award or not.  But it's absolutely scandalous that the first hurdle is in reality geared to fail people and make them need to fight for what they are entitled to, despite often being very unwell and really not able to fight without it making them even more unwell.

OP doesn't give any time scales on the anxiety and severity, so I stand by the fact they have already been assessed for mobility and not awarded.  Given that they are now outside the time frame to dispute the original assessment/outcome.  They are aware that they risk loosing their PIP if they start a new claim.  So what I wanted to do is ensure that they were fully aware of the risk.  I totally get what you’re both saying but sadly for some the dispute process is too much to think about. 

So the question is, does the OP stay with Activity based PIP payments, or risk it by requesting a new assessment for what they may believe lead to a mobility award.   They have already been through an assessment so should be aware how difficult the application and assessment can be.

Assessors are “gatekeepers” but depending on how they carry out the assessment can affect the claimant massively.  Ive seen an assessor loose the claimant within a few questions, just because of the way they phased them.   I only did PIP assessments for 6 months but I struggled with what I was being made to do, although I agree with the principles of pip, the whole way it is assessed is not user friendly or transparent for the claimant.  Yes you can request your assessment but Id question how many proactively do this?  Or just leave it at the assessment level if turned down or under assessed.     

I take on board what you've both said and will try to make it clear I’m talking about the assessment.

Spoonie_Turtle

peteuk said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

HillStreetBlues said:

peteuk said:

I am only going by experience and what I was taught, either during initial training or through mentored assessments. 

Ive seen a drivers license/use of car used for many activities. 

For OPD - the threshold is high and it does need hard evidence, because of the high threshold.  For instance if the OP can  take medication prescribed by GP and leave the house then its not OPD, but if there is consultant letters, mix of medication tried etc then your more likely to get OPD proven.

Please don't get me wrong, I totally agree that the drivers license is wrong, but Id rather people know what they are up against.   

I do feel you need to make it clear that you talking about how a "assessment" might work, in case you put someone off from claiming.

Completely agree.  What you are talking about peteuk is the initial assessment, not whether they could actually be entitled to PIP according to the actual criteria.  While it's good to prepare people, the way you word it makes it sound like they wouldn't be entitled to PIP rather than you warning of the outcome of the assessment - which is often totally irrelevant to whether someone is actually entitled to PIP.

Thankfully assessors are 'only' the initial gatekeepers not the ultimate arbiters of whether people get an award or not.  But it's absolutely scandalous that the first hurdle is in reality geared to fail people and make them need to fight for what they are entitled to, despite often being very unwell and really not able to fight without it making them even more unwell.

OP doesn't give any time scales on the anxiety and severity, so I stand by the fact they have already been assessed for mobility and not awarded.  Given that they are now outside the time frame to dispute the original assessment/outcome.  They are aware that they risk loosing their PIP if they start a new claim.  So what I wanted to do is ensure that they were fully aware of the risk.  I totally get what you’re both saying but sadly for some the dispute process is too much to think about. 

…

Assessors are “gatekeepers” but depending on how they carry out the assessment can affect the claimant massively.  Ive seen an assessor loose the claimant within a few questions, just because of the way they phased them.   I only did PIP assessments for 6 months but I struggled with what I was being made to do, although I agree with the principles of pip, the whole way it is assessed is not user friendly or transparent for the claimant.  Yes you can request your assessment but Id question how many proactively do this?  Or just leave it at the assessment level if turned down or under assessed.     

I take on board what you've both said and will try to make it clear I’m talking about the assessment.

Completely agree, which is one reason why coming onto sites like this people need to know what the criteria mean and how they will be assessed against the criteria by an independent tribunal if they have to take it that far.  Knowing what they would likely be actually entitled to is one way of trying to help people not be discouraged and give up, if they can at all fight or find someone who can fight for them.

I do appreciate hearing your insights as an explanation of why assessments are so disgustingly flawed, it is helpful to know a little about the reality of training and what's required of the assessors. 
It is however important to keep the two things clearly separate for people being advice - the reality of what an initial assessment outcome might be, and independently what they might/should be entitled to under the law.

I also acknowledge I overlooked/misinterpreted the timescales of the OP, in which case an MR may not be possible for them for this current award.  Which is unfortunate, as if they'd known sooner about what the criteria meant they could have potentially pursued it with virtually no real risk.

HillStreetBlues

@peteuk
I should have emboldened the part I disagreed with,  as totally agree the OP could have an full assessment and lose their current award. 
Sadly assessors lost me a few years ago, I go in expecting a false report, and all but one twice they have lived down to my expectations.
My ones start with the assessors asking me "do yo know why you are here?"
My reply now is "So you can write stuff down that I never said  or done"  at least we both know where we stand.

PixelPound

HillStreetBlues said:

@peteuk
I should have emboldened the part I disagreed with,  as totally agree the OP could have an full assessment and lose their current award. 
Sadly assessors lost me a few years ago, I go in expecting a false report, and all but one time they have lived down to my expectations.
My ones start with the assessors asking me "do yo know why you are here?"
My reply now is "So you can write stuff down that I never said  or done"  at least we both know where we stand.

Would you or could you record an assessment. Could you say to the assessor at the start "Just to let you know I'm recording this for an accurate record". Would this be allowed?

Helping someone with their PIP claim and it seems that the assessors main role is like insurance loss adjusters, to minimise how many awards are paid.

I wonder how many who need it and should qualify are put off from applying or get the initial assessment back and don't challenge.

To the OP, in regards to whether they'd qualify - when you say you don't go out without your mum, the question is what would happen if you tried. I gather that often an assessor will simply take it that you prefer to go out with your mum, so it's not that you don't go anywhere without your mum but why there is the need. Is it a case of you'd get disorientated, would be far too anxious to ask anyone for help, could possibly result in harm to yourself or someone else. Or you wouldn't get past the gate without anxiety levels peaking and not be able to go further. 

That assessors can get away with believing someone simply prefers never to go outdoors anywhere or to never cook a meal and live on cereal/crisps and not qualify, baffles me. 

HillStreetBlues

@nic_c I haven't recorded an assessment but plan to do so in the future.
I corrected my last post as it is twice I've had a honest assessment for PIP, both of these when I basically told them I thought they would lie.
The first one I said it to did say "I don't do that"  and she went on to explain how it was just  temporary doing this as she was recovering from a broken leg. She then told me how she had twice been called into the office with "guidance" as the feedback from her assessments were well above the average for "points"  and if she maintained this it might hinder a  contract renewal.  She then said she didn't care as she wanted to do it honestly and was out of there in 3 weeks. True to her word it was a totally honest one.  Also found out how the system really worked.
The second one might have thought I was recording it, or could have been one of the good guys.

Sorry Coldste for taking your thread OT.
Please do look at the points for mobility and if you score 8 or more then do think about asking for a reassessment, taking into  account of the warning you could lose your current award. 

peteuk

nic_c said:.

Would you or could you record an assessment. Could you say to the assessor at the start "Just to let you know I'm recording this for an accurate record". Would this be allowed?
. 

I never had the need to record a telephone assessment, but I am lead to believe it can be done at the claimants request. 

I don't want to hijack the thread too much.  

ayupmeduck

peteuk said:

Your Pip assessment would have covered mobility, so you have already been assessed for it.  Some would argue that having a drivers license gives you the capacity to plan a route and so will discount the mobility section (It was still happening in 2022).

The threshold for not leaving the house is high, and will need hard evidence to back it up.

The risk as you point out is you will have a full assessment and losing your award,

They could potentially get some points but wouldn't trigger an award. If they can drive they can navigate, have road safety awareness etc. They wouldn't have a full assessment again, if anything a quick phone call and form completed.

Spoonie_Turtle

ayupmeduck said:

peteuk said:

Your Pip assessment would have covered mobility, so you have already been assessed for it.  Some would argue that having a drivers license gives you the capacity to plan a route and so will discount the mobility section (It was still happening in 2022).

The threshold for not leaving the house is high, and will need hard evidence to back it up.

The risk as you point out is you will have a full assessment and losing your award,

They could potentially get some points but wouldn't trigger an award. If they can drive they can navigate, have road safety awareness etc. They wouldn't have a full assessment again, if anything a quick phone call and form completed.

*sigh* not this again.

A driving license means you were able to learn and drive with someone accompanying you at some point in the past.  It doesn't mean you can't possibly be too anxious or overwhelmed to do it by yourself ( - or in the case of acquired disability, still able to be aware of road safety, physically able to be upright for an hour, able to concentrate for the length of a lesson, etc.)

I quite like the utopia you live in where they don't do full assessment appointments unless they think they *really* have to, though

Muttleythefrog

ayupmeduck said:

peteuk said:

Your Pip assessment would have covered mobility, so you have already been assessed for it.  Some would argue that having a drivers license gives you the capacity to plan a route and so will discount the mobility section (It was still happening in 2022).

The threshold for not leaving the house is high, and will need hard evidence to back it up.

The risk as you point out is you will have a full assessment and losing your award,

They could potentially get some points but wouldn't trigger an award. If they can drive they can navigate, have road safety awareness etc. They wouldn't have a full assessment again, if anything a quick phone call and form completed.

They're learning to drive I understand so presumably always accompanied and in any case they may still be unfit to drive (many with licences evidently are)... there's also no guarantee someone with a licence actually drives... my mother hasn't for over 40 years. These kind of wild extrapolations on basic and often misleading info (I gave my own example of having attended mainstream education so could not have difficulty making financial decisions) is at the very heart of the failures of assessments and decisions at the DWP. Regardless it is of course entirely possible they'll have a 'full assessment' at some future review... I was hoping we'd have more info on when that could be so timings of potentially getting a different award could be contextualised for advice. Of course tribunals also likely to take a more complete and intelligent review of evidence to apply the actual law than contracted HCPs or DWP DMs where their reports or decisions often require little scrutiny to fall... and as we know often the DWP decision bears little to no relationship to that outcome at appeal.

I also think your post is reckless and potentially harmful. The poster has autism and clearly is not an expert on the processes of PIP... so any statement informing them "... but wouldn't trigger an award" (even if considered in reference to a statement of another poster rather than directly regarding the Op) may be taken literally and as gospel and should not be... it's possible facts (many of which we will not know) will be differently interpreted or applied by different people looking at the same. I'm sure there are posters on this thread including myself as example who have had varying awards (at least at descriptor level) over time despite no material change in conditions or disablements... indeed at my last review (paper based) the DWP DM decided there had been no changes and so the same descriptors were applied (they were not...lol.. I gained points in one activity and had increased points in another.. the DM one would assume simply lacked the inclination or time to refute or corroborate anything in the HCPs report and rubber stamped what they thought was true). I also think "They wouldn't have a full assessment again" is again problematic... you cannot know this... we know fine well you get differing responses to 'my award is not correct/my disabilities have changed' type calls and we don't even appear to have a timeline here... not to mention claimants are often subject to full assessments unnecessarily. This is not science... it's people and poor processes... inconsistency is rife.