PIP was 2nd claim with new conditions but from 15 April 2025 new 3rd claim as advised.

tifo

"You will destroy your claim if you keep harking back to what happened in the past especially with irrelavant matters (WCA)"

I know users are saying "stop mentioning WCA in your PIP assessment" but this is what the DWP did by bringing my WCA assessment report into my previous PIP tribunal (and vice versa) which they used to say i'm ok to work (in the report) so am ok for everything else. in my PIP tribunal i had to argue against both assessment. They ignored that i'd got LCW at the tribunal.

tifo

poppy12345 said:

Right, so you've had a diagnosis of OA and decided that you should try again to claim PIP based purely on that diagnosis alone. Based on everything you've said in your last comment, I really can't see that you qualify. I'm sorry if this isn't what you want to hear but it's true.  

If it meets the descriptors and is causing me mobility issues then yes. It's not only a diagnosis, at the moment it's affecting my mobility than what is 'normal'. How else can i say this.

It's up to the PIP assessor to decide if i meet any descriptor. From my past experience i have no confidence in  a fair report.

Muttleythefrog

I think maybe strip everything back. Honestly appraise yourself... current disablements... against the PIP criteria and see if you should get an award. If you would then yes make claim and make compelling case for the descriptors in the relevant activities that apply and with clear mind face assessment of how you meet such while also introducing to process evidence that is supportive.

There's definitely a theme of people thinking there is speculative or limited chances of PIP award here and it is getting messy with the variance of conditions and disablement over time... the recent post about percentages of time affected, although somewhat relevant given the reliability criteria for activities, also looks somewhat desperate and frankly I am not surprised you've been considered an unreliable witness to tribunal if that is the sort of approach you took. Ultimately though what we think doesn't matter... we won't decide but I would only engage the PIP processes again if confident you should qualify for an award based on criteria. As it stands it sounds like you are confident you should get a mobility award but would not daily living.

born_again

tifo said:

"You will destroy your claim if you keep harking back to what happened in the past especially with irrelavant matters (WCA)"

I know users are saying "stop mentioning WCA in your PIP assessment" but this is what the DWP did by bringing my WCA assessment report into my previous PIP tribunal (and vice versa) which they used to say i'm ok to work (in the report) so am ok for everything else. in my PIP tribunal i had to argue against both assessment. They ignored that i'd got LCW at the tribunal.

You need to forget the last claim. That's in the past & gone.

Focus on the new one. But just stick to PIP, not bring WCA into your posts.

You can add WCA as evidence to DWP, but make sure that it is backing up your own evidence. Which you need to show why you can only manage 20 to 50 m most of the time. 
I hope you realise just how short a distance this is & if you say you can go shopping at a supermarket, it is not helping at all. As driving to & walking around a supermarket far exceeds that many times over.

So do you have a walking stick or frame to help with walking?

Cressida100

It's very confusing when you keep mentioning percentages. Have a read of your posts out loud and see how confusing that would be to any assessor. 

sammyjammy

tifo said:

Indie_Kid said:

M25 said:

You best know how bad you pain is and how much you can walk/mobilise on the worst days so clearly write that down and then look at the descriptors. This should be very simple. Looking at others' experience would be helpful too.

It's how you are most of the time. You can write about bad days but you can't just write about those.

Yes i know this, bad days have to be 51% or over.

In the last PIP assessment i was 51% and over with gout (7 months moderate over the year up to 50 metres with rest) and i keep saying the assessor made things up that i'd not said and extended the minority to mean majority. I can't empathise this enough.

For example, the assessor asked if i can shop at the supermarket, I said "yes, when i can walk without gout" which would mean on a good day. She wrote "he's ok shopping in the supermarket for more than half hour". She also wrote that i drop my young children to activities and back daily which i'd not said because my kids are over 20 when all i mentioned was that i do "school runs when i can on a good day".

To top it up and which i could never overcome, the judge said she doesn't believe me as credible.

I've never met you but based on this thread alone I'd say I agree with that judge, you seem intent on fitting into a place where you get PIP regardless of the truth.

Harsh maybe.

poppy12345

tifo said:

poppy12345 said:

Right, so you've had a diagnosis of OA and decided that you should try again to claim PIP based purely on that diagnosis alone. Based on everything you've said in your last comment, I really can't see that you qualify. I'm sorry if this isn't what you want to hear but it's true.  

If it meets the descriptors and is causing me mobility issues then yes. It's not only a diagnosis, at the moment it's affecting my mobility than what is 'normal'. How else can i say this.

It's up to the PIP assessor to decide if i meet any descriptor. From my past experience i have no confidence in  a fair report.

It maybe affecting your mobility but based on the percentages in a previous comment, you won't score the points needed for an award. You can't "make" yourself fit into the descriptors. 

Spoonie_Turtle

I think at this point it's simple.  If you truly believe that for more than half the time you score 8 points or more, taking into account reliably/repeatedly/etc. (stopping to have a rest counts towards the time taken, but if you can continue X metres after resting, the overall distance will be added up not each spurt taken alone), just focus on how it's affecting your life now. 

Forget the previous process, forget the assessment, forget the tribunal, forget what you wrote on your previous claim. 

Start afresh, detail your daily activities on 'good', bad, and average days, how often each of those kinds of days/weeks/months happen, and what effect doing each activity has. 
Don't use percentages, use time periods (and maybe fractions like 'half the year', but don't focus on it).  The rest of your daily activities need to align with what you're saying about your mobility for your claim to stand a chance of being credible.  While descriptors are written in isolation, the decision for which one best fits isn't taken in isolation.  They need a picture of your overall life to decide which descriptors apply to you.  This means that even if you wouldn't score enough for daily living, they would expect doing certain activities to affect you due to your conditions.


I very very rarely dismiss someone online, especially on an anonymous forum* because we never have all the information.  However from the way you've gone around in circles and tied yourself up in knots, if you have done that during your previous claim and at the tribunal I can understand why the judge found you not to be credible.  That's not to say I personally think they're correct - like I said, we don't have all the information so I'm not going to draw conclusions myself.      
Just, if you do feel you should make a new claim focus on being clear, finding the middle ground so you're not overexplaining but telling them all they need to know, and focus on this claim here and now, not what's gone before.

[*The only time I'll do that is if someone is clearly being a troll, or is completely uninformed and stubbornly refusing to heed the facts.]

M25

tifo said:

the judge said she doesn't believe me as credible.

That's very unfortunate and what a lot of people have been hinting at in this thread.

That essentially means your evidence is unreliable (ie they think you're a liar). I don't know everything that's been said so I can't comment further.

You need to minimise what you write and say to anyone in trying to get PIP. That is not general advice it's very specific to this thread.

The new claim has nothing to do with the past and if you inject anything from the past or your opinions you will fail, again.

The descriptors should be your only reference.

marcia_

poppy12345 said:

tifo said:

poppy12345 said:

Right, so you've had a diagnosis of OA and decided that you should try again to claim PIP based purely on that diagnosis alone. Based on everything you've said in your last comment, I really can't see that you qualify. I'm sorry if this isn't what you want to hear but it's true.  

If it meets the descriptors and is causing me mobility issues then yes. It's not only a diagnosis, at the moment it's affecting my mobility than what is 'normal'. How else can i say this.

It's up to the PIP assessor to decide if i meet any descriptor. From my past experience i have no confidence in  a fair report.

It maybe affecting your mobility but based on the percentages in a previous comment, you won't score the points needed for an award. You can't "make" yourself fit into the descriptors. 

 I agree with this, it appears you are stretching to make yourself eligible when there is no medical evidence to show it to be true. Hence the judge's comments regarding not being credible.