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

tifo

Cressida100 said:

You read the advice and then you parrot the same old. Assessor lied, they used your ethnicity against you, didn't like the fact you could drive and so on ........... Might it just be that you do not qualify for PIP?

You may not believe it but it's true, that PIP report was full of made up statements, only I know this.

I've not said anything about race .... you've just said it by "they used your ethnicity against you", I didn't say they've done this. I said being the same ethnicity they said some things which are not relevant but which they made up.

Cressida100

tifo said:

Cressida100 said:

You read the advice and then you parrot the same old. Assessor lied, they used your ethnicity against you, didn't like the fact you could drive and so on ........... Might it just be that you do not qualify for PIP?

You may not believe it but it's true, that PIP report was full of made up statements, only I know this.

I've not said anything about race .... you've just said it by "they used your ethnicity against you", I didn't say they've done this. I said being the same ethnicity they said some things which are not relevant but which they made up.

Apologies if I misread it, I just wonder if you are overthinking things.

tifo

Muttleythefrog said:

tifo said:

Where I said "The assessor stated that my wife helping me doesn't constitute social support", the assessor's words are "FH showing difficulties when engaging with others ... without prompting" but then she says "he reports needing social support ... this is inconsistent with the FH showing his wife does not appear to be providing any specific support, his children can help him too". But in the FH info she says "his wife will prompt him and his children will help sometimes ... he takes his wife to appointments ... even to the GP ... he said it is the moral and social support ... he doesn't think she knows what to do".

Can someone interpret the above? And what does "he doesn't think she knows what to do" mean? Is she saying my wife doesn't know what to do? But being there and supportive is all she needs to do.

I got 2 points with the above but i say it should be 4 with the 'social support' rather than 'prompting' as per descriptor and UT cases.

For planning and following journeys there is also some social support aspect.

I can interpret the above... I may be wrong but I assume FH means family history... 

They don't think your wife does anything specific to support you (other than prompting which they score you for)... they do not think you have the level of disablement for the social support descriptor. The assessor seems to think that the wife's support is as you described it to her. If she was providing specific support you would be able to detail it clearly as it is something you repeatedly experience... it looks like you failed to do that and instead indicated your wife doesn't provide such. I don't know how they could possibly conclude you need social support when you yourself struggle to specify what that means and admit your wife doesn't either. I mean if I tell you I need someone to help me take my medication but the person who helps me doesn't even know what medication I take and doesn't know how I'm supposed to take it... one might conclude they're not helping me take my medication.. right? If this is how your assessments play out then I'm not surprised they're zero scoring you... you should be able to detail very clearly help you get and problems you suffer..and the problems you suffer when you don't get that support you need.... after all.. it is meant to be your daily reality... your lived experience. 'Just being there' is entirely unconvincing....and indicates any requirement of their support seems minimal to overcome minor problems. She doesn't seem to provide any active support. There's also indication you may imply or tell assessors you prefer your own space and company if out... is she help or hindrance they may wonder.

In your other post regarding case law you conclude:
"So in that context I receive social support from my wife and my friends which meets the activity requirement" - I see no evidence from you this is true and clearly nor did the assessor... it's not what you're describing at all. It seems more you are hoping others think that's what is happening... unless you are failing to actually detail support you get. 

"I may be wrong but I assume FH means family history". It means Functional History and it's where they write what's been said by me in the assessment

 When the assessor says "he doesn't think she knows what to do" this was from her question about the social support, the assessor asked if my wife is a trained professional in social support and the reply that my wife "doesn't know" was in the context of that, i.e. i said "no, she's not a trained professional but a spouse helping the best she can". So the assessor said "he doesn't think she knows what to do". But i didn't say that.

I get what you say and i'm better at writing than speaking, this is why i'm not properly explaining what's in my head and even though i have it all there it doesn't come out that way. I'm quite forgetful these days (than say, 10 years ago when i worked in a trained professional capacity). But that's how the appointments are and i try the best i can. Each assessment is different and there's no set way to prepare for it, i have all my submitted docs in front of me but going through them is hard when the assessor moves from one point to another then back to the same point again and using the computer is not an option as i use a mobile phone to answer the call and my hands won't be free. That's another point she used, i.e. "can use a mobile phone". She called me on a mobile phone and asked the question "can you use a mobile phone" which she's of course used to say i can hold it etc. But i've not said anything about my hand or fingers in the claim.

"you should be able to detail very clearly help you get and problems you suffer", i do try and do this, i.e. detail the help i get and why and how and what would happen if i didn't get that help and what i'm able to do when i get it.

peteuk

tifo said:

When the assessor says "he doesn't think she knows what to do" this was from her question about the social support, the assessor asked if my wife is a trained professional in social support and the reply that my wife "doesn't know" was in the context of that, i.e. i said "no, she's not a trained professional but a spouse helping the best she can". So the assessor said "he doesn't think she knows what to do". But i didn't say that.

I am going back a few years and I will do some digging later tonight, but there is a difference in the PIP world between a trained and untrained person providing support. From memory you cant claim support unless the provider is trained but don't take that as gospel.

I have previously suggested on other threads to take each activity a week at a time, noting why you can’t do something. Just make notes on that activity.  Then when you’ve got all of them cross reference them.  Think of what the assessor may be looking at.

If you can stand to cook a simple meal, you can stand to wash.

Make sure if your claiming something for one activity, you’re claiming it in other similar activity.

tifo

peteuk said:

tifo said:

When the assessor says "he doesn't think she knows what to do" this was from her question about the social support, the assessor asked if my wife is a trained professional in social support and the reply that my wife "doesn't know" was in the context of that, i.e. i said "no, she's not a trained professional but a spouse helping the best she can". So the assessor said "he doesn't think she knows what to do". But i didn't say that.

I am going back a few years and I will do some digging later tonight, but there is a difference in the PIP world between a trained and untrained person providing support. From memory you cant claim support unless the provider is trained but don't take that as gospel.

I have previously suggested on other threads to take each activity a week at a time, noting why you can’t do something. Just make notes on that activity.  Then when you’ve got all of them cross reference them.  Think of what the assessor may be looking at.

If you can stand to cook a simple meal, you can stand to wash.

Make sure if your claiming something for one activity, you’re claiming it in other similar activity.

"From memory you cant claim support unless the provider is trained but don't take that as gospel".

In several UT cases and the government's position is that "Some respondents were concerned that our definition of social support excludes friends and family. This is not the case, we recognise the importance of friends and family and that is why our definition of social support is: ‘support from persons trained or experienced in assisting people to engage in social situations’. By referring to ‘experienced’ we mean both people such as friends and family who know the individual well and can offer support, or those who do not know them but are more generally used to providing social support for individuals with health conditions or impairments". From SL v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP) [2016] UKUT 0147 (AAC).

I quoted the above in a previous post.

"If you can stand to cook a simple meal, you can stand to wash. Make sure if your claiming something for one activity, you’re claiming it in other similar activity".

I did try and do this. For example, I said that with a gout or OA flare up I can't stand long enough to cook a meal but also can't stand long enough to wash my lower limbs and hence use a stool and can't stand long enough to put pyjama bottoms on so sit on the bed. And can't walk far so rest and put my feet up. This is all true, the slight pain in my knees is always there and sometimes flares up that i can't bend them (more in the left knee) and they're stiff and it feels like i'm pulling tendons. The gout often flares up and severe means i can't walk 1 metre, definitely never 20 metres, but moderate means i may be able to walk up to 50 metres with stops. They don't include stops as resting so in the report it says "can walk for more than 10 minutes which is more than 200 metres" but she hasn't said "rests twice for a few minutes so actual walking is maybe 5 minutes which could be 100 metres". She asked this several times. In this respect i'd ask if it meet the requirement of "reliably (safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and in reasonable time)". I say it doesn't because after the 10 minute walk i'd need a rest for a few hours and not repeat it and it would have taken me twice as long as a person who doesn't have these issues.

NedS

tifo said:

peteuk said:

tifo said:

When the assessor says "he doesn't think she knows what to do" this was from her question about the social support, the assessor asked if my wife is a trained professional in social support and the reply that my wife "doesn't know" was in the context of that, i.e. i said "no, she's not a trained professional but a spouse helping the best she can". So the assessor said "he doesn't think she knows what to do". But i didn't say that.

I am going back a few years and I will do some digging later tonight, but there is a difference in the PIP world between a trained and untrained person providing support. From memory you cant claim support unless the provider is trained but don't take that as gospel.

I have previously suggested on other threads to take each activity a week at a time, noting why you can’t do something. Just make notes on that activity.  Then when you’ve got all of them cross reference them.  Think of what the assessor may be looking at.

If you can stand to cook a simple meal, you can stand to wash.

Make sure if your claiming something for one activity, you’re claiming it in other similar activity.

"From memory you cant claim support unless the provider is trained but don't take that as gospel".

In several UT cases and the government's position is that "Some respondents were concerned that our definition of social support excludes friends and family. This is not the case, we recognise the importance of friends and family and that is why our definition of social support is: ‘support from persons trained or experienced in assisting people to engage in social situations’. By referring to ‘experienced’ we mean both people such as friends and family who know the individual well and can offer support, or those who do not know them but are more generally used to providing social support for individuals with health conditions or impairments". From SL v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP) [2016] UKUT 0147 (AAC).

I quoted the above in a previous post.

Indeed, but an assessor will likely give more weight of evidence to "I have a social services support worker who takes me out 3 times a week to assist with shopping and social engagement" than "my friends take me to the pub 3 times a week to assist with my social engagement", or "I go to the pub 3 times a week with my friends".

All 3 examples fit the UT description above for social support.

Spoonie_Turtle

tifo said:

peteuk said:

tifo said:

When the assessor says "he doesn't think she knows what to do" this was from her question about the social support, the assessor asked if my wife is a trained professional in social support and the reply that my wife "doesn't know" was in the context of that, i.e. i said "no, she's not a trained professional but a spouse helping the best she can". So the assessor said "he doesn't think she knows what to do". But i didn't say that.

I am going back a few years and I will do some digging later tonight, but there is a difference in the PIP world between a trained and untrained person providing support. From memory you cant claim support unless the provider is trained but don't take that as gospel.

I have previously suggested on other threads to take each activity a week at a time, noting why you can’t do something. Just make notes on that activity.  Then when you’ve got all of them cross reference them.  Think of what the assessor may be looking at.

If you can stand to cook a simple meal, you can stand to wash.

Make sure if your claiming something for one activity, you’re claiming it in other similar activity.

"If you can stand to cook a simple meal, you can stand to wash. Make sure if your claiming something for one activity, you’re claiming it in other similar activity".

I did try and do this. For example, I said that with a gout or OA flare up I can't stand long enough to cook a meal but also can't stand long enough to wash my lower limbs and hence use a stool and can't stand long enough to put pyjama bottoms on so sit on the bed. 

Okay but when you commented going through the points you think you should have scored, there's no mention of this at all.

And needing to sit to dress explicitly does not count (even though for able-bodied people this may be a desire rather than the need it is for some physically disabled people, that's case law that's been established for quite some time).

There are many other vaguaries and inconsistencies even in what you write here, as well as gaps in your understanding about PIP despite having been directed over the past several years where to learn about it and lots of explanations and guidance here.  I'm afraid I also have to wonder whether it would be healthier for you to just accept that even if the outcome were based on a perfect assessment in which they wired you verbatim, you still would not qualify.

Even if you were generously scored those points for physical mobility, it does not sound like you would score for planning and following journeys (because that is a REALLY high threshold) in which case you wouldn't qualify for the mobility component anyway.

Muttleythefrog

tifo said:

Muttleythefrog said:

tifo said:

Where I said "The assessor stated that my wife helping me doesn't constitute social support", the assessor's words are "FH showing difficulties when engaging with others ... without prompting" but then she says "he reports needing social support ... this is inconsistent with the FH showing his wife does not appear to be providing any specific support, his children can help him too". But in the FH info she says "his wife will prompt him and his children will help sometimes ... he takes his wife to appointments ... even to the GP ... he said it is the moral and social support ... he doesn't think she knows what to do".

Can someone interpret the above? And what does "he doesn't think she knows what to do" mean? Is she saying my wife doesn't know what to do? But being there and supportive is all she needs to do.

I got 2 points with the above but i say it should be 4 with the 'social support' rather than 'prompting' as per descriptor and UT cases.

For planning and following journeys there is also some social support aspect.

I can interpret the above... I may be wrong but I assume FH means family history... 

They don't think your wife does anything specific to support you (other than prompting which they score you for)... they do not think you have the level of disablement for the social support descriptor. The assessor seems to think that the wife's support is as you described it to her. If she was providing specific support you would be able to detail it clearly as it is something you repeatedly experience... it looks like you failed to do that and instead indicated your wife doesn't provide such. I don't know how they could possibly conclude you need social support when you yourself struggle to specify what that means and admit your wife doesn't either. I mean if I tell you I need someone to help me take my medication but the person who helps me doesn't even know what medication I take and doesn't know how I'm supposed to take it... one might conclude they're not helping me take my medication.. right? If this is how your assessments play out then I'm not surprised they're zero scoring you... you should be able to detail very clearly help you get and problems you suffer..and the problems you suffer when you don't get that support you need.... after all.. it is meant to be your daily reality... your lived experience. 'Just being there' is entirely unconvincing....and indicates any requirement of their support seems minimal to overcome minor problems. She doesn't seem to provide any active support. There's also indication you may imply or tell assessors you prefer your own space and company if out... is she help or hindrance they may wonder.

In your other post regarding case law you conclude:
"So in that context I receive social support from my wife and my friends which meets the activity requirement" - I see no evidence from you this is true and clearly nor did the assessor... it's not what you're describing at all. It seems more you are hoping others think that's what is happening... unless you are failing to actually detail support you get. 

"I may be wrong but I assume FH means family history". It means Functional History and it's where they write what's been said by me in the assessment

 When the assessor says "he doesn't think she knows what to do" this was from her question about the social support, the assessor asked if my wife is a trained professional in social support and the reply that my wife "doesn't know" was in the context of that, i.e. i said "no, she's not a trained professional but a spouse helping the best she can". So the assessor said "he doesn't think she knows what to do". But i didn't say that.

I get what you say and i'm better at writing than speaking, this is why i'm not properly explaining what's in my head and even though i have it all there it doesn't come out that way. I'm quite forgetful these days (than say, 10 years ago when i worked in a trained professional capacity). But that's how the appointments are and i try the best i can. Each assessment is different and there's no set way to prepare for it, i have all my submitted docs in front of me but going through them is hard when the assessor moves from one point to another then back to the same point again and using the computer is not an option as i use a mobile phone to answer the call and my hands won't be free. That's another point she used, i.e. "can use a mobile phone". She called me on a mobile phone and asked the question "can you use a mobile phone" which she's of course used to say i can hold it etc. But i've not said anything about my hand or fingers in the claim.

"you should be able to detail very clearly help you get and problems you suffer", i do try and do this, i.e. detail the help i get and why and how and what would happen if i didn't get that help and what i'm able to do when i get it.

Ah yes... functional history... sorry... foggy brain... it should have been on tip of tongue but wasn't.

'helping the best she can' I would say could be easily interpreted to mean doesn't know what to do. You need to be aggressively specific in these assessments.. spell out the reality... not leave them to interpret your lack of information as they likely will if it makes life easier. If in your paperwork you are spelling it out then maybe the assessor is showing flaw. There is some evidence from what you report otherwise that the assessor did not entirely believe what you were telling them.

"Each assessment is different and there's no set way to prepare for it" - that's the idea... because it means truth and real behaviour is more likely to come forth. Aside from being familiar with what you've submitted in writing and evidence... all you need is your truth. I don't particularly know why you'd need to be able to use your computer in assessment... I use my PC extensively and feel reassured having documents or facts available for things like calls and medical appointments (telephone).. but I do this for the benefit of them and me.. it'd be no use to my oncologist if I couldn't convey what medicines I need re-prescribing... the consultant isn't interested to know whether I've got a good memory or not etc but one way or another they need to know what to prescribe so if a document I have helps me detail that then great. But in a PIP assessment they want to see your truth... if that means you take medications but cannot remember the names or when or how to take them then that's the truth and it may be relevant to an activity like managing treatment.

"you should be able to detail very clearly help you get and problems you suffer" - you say you do try and do this... we can only assume you do out of our sight... because as per the previous post of Spoonie it is evident there is inconsistency here... it's unclear what grounds you're having problems in an activity until you state.. but then it seems later to change... and my assumptions are typically wrong (I had for example assumed all the furore over OCD would mean it is disabling across many Daily Living activities and fundamental to the entire claim.. but it looks more likely gout is the issue now from above reading). So it's very confusing and difficult to technically help.

I agree with Spoonie's advice... this is time to focus on your health and family life I would suggest. Do you think it would help you if we.. me.. some here.. were to say you should not qualify for PIP or we do not consider you would be entitled to PIP based on what you've said in 46 pages here... would that psychologically help you break from what is clearly an unhealthy obsession (the fact you try to minimalise it and argue about dates just enhances that opinion!) that has had no apparent benefit... or rather certainly no apparent benefit so far. I am conscious you are highly selective regarding advice to the point you will actually re-interpret it or select what you liked to the ignorance of parts you didn't... you are engaging in what I would suggest is harmful behaviours here and I've had to question whether my input is causing a prolonging of that. If you were to be successful what would be the cost... you're already looking to an MR and then more likely than not an appeal which could be many months ahead if not over a year... and even then success could be short lived because you've just started treatments for illnesses you claim disable you. I fear your fight to get PIP will counter the medical attempts to assist you in that failures of treatment may aid the PIP claim or any award longevity...conflict of interest if you like.