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

Spoonie_Turtle

 … and?  They can be wrong about that and still be right that the effects you've described don't reach the threshold.

You keep raising new (and then going back to old) issues, to be blunt it sounds like you're grasping for any reason to discredit the outcome - but none of it is convincing or even makes good sense.  You're trying yourself in knots trying to fit into the PIP descriptors but if you don't then you don't, it's just not going to work.

Please make sure this is brought up at an appropriate juncture in your therapy appointments, if it hasn't been already.  Hopefully with progress there you might, on time, be able to start letting this go and move on with your life.

KxMx

I don't drive but still have a BB, for occasional use when in a friends car or when it would be useful in a taxi. 

tifo

Spoonie_Turtle said:

Please make sure this is brought up at an appropriate juncture in your therapy appointments, if it hasn't been already.

I mentioned PIP in the initial phone call because, i can't remember now, it came up somehow, i think they were asking if i work and what benefits i'm on etc. The lady said "you can use our letter for them" but to be fair to her she's just saying it and wasn't the counsellor.

It also came up with the counsellor in the first therapy session but she didn't say anything on it.

Now that you bring it up, i'll ask her at the next session.

Cressida100

tifo said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

Please make sure this is brought up at an appropriate juncture in your therapy appointments, if it hasn't been already.

I mentioned PIP in the initial phone call because, i can't remember now, it came up somehow, i think they were asking if i work and what benefits i'm on etc. The lady said "you can use our letter for them" but to be fair to her she's just saying it and wasn't the counsellor.

It also came up with the counsellor in the first therapy session but she didn't say anything on it.

Now that you bring it up, i'll ask her at the next session.

You have completely misread the post from @Spoonie_Turtle.

born_again

tifo said:

born_again said:

I know, and the point is i've never said my vision isn't fine in any assessments, lack of vision is nowhere in my claim .... i say one eye (blind) is always (100% of the time) affected because of the conditions i have and this affects my daily living, physically and mentally (pain (more than 50% of the time), migraine left side (occasionally), high eye pressure (40+, 100% of the time), several inflammations (100% of the time), tears (more than 50% of the time)). The second eye has occasional issues but nothing substantial to worry my consultant or his team (regular hospital check-ups) but they keep an eye on it (pun intended) because if i get the same conditions in my other eye it'll be leading to blindness.

I found that contradictory. Either it is or it isn't?

If this is how you come across in assessments, then I can see why you keep getting declined.

As it effects your daily living then it should be part of your reasons & explanations on how it effects your actions in the descriptors.

I genuinely don't understand why it's contradictory .... i don't claim any lack of vision but that the inflamed, painful left eye affects my daily living, not mobility, and there's only occasional issues with the right eye but no vision issues, i.e. i can see fine with it. This is demonstrated from my regular eye tests.

It's not part of your claim, but effects your daily living ??? 

I guess this is just like you dropped mental issues in last assessment. While not adding it to the form, just dropped it in the call.

No wonder the assessors all come to the same decision. 
To be frank, they simply do not believe what you are telling them, just the same as the tribunal did not.
No disrespect but. Sorry can't sugar coat this.

I'm used to reading & listing to what people say to find out if I can help them.

tifo

Cressida100 said:

I mentioned PIP in the initial phone call because, i can't remember now, it came up somehow, i think they were asking if i work and what benefits i'm on etc. The lady said "you can use our letter for them" but to be fair to her she's just saying it and wasn't the counsellor.

It also came up with the counsellor in the first therapy session but she didn't say anything on it.

Now that you bring it up, i'll ask her at the next session.

You have completely misread the post from @Spoonie_Turtle.

I know what was said, that i should get therapy for being obsessed with my PIP claim ....

sheramber

tifo said:

I get it that they use having a driving license as a reason for no points across multiple activities even when millions of successful PIP claimants have a driving license and even if i don't drive (as many people with a driving license don't) but i don't get how they can use the lack of a blue badge as reasons that mobility across multiple activities is fine. This is a new one to me this time. PIP and a blue badge have different criteria and assessments and a blue badge is only for parking a vehicle outside. I could have a driving license but no car hence no need for a blue badge.

But if I had a blue badge i bet they wouldn't say i have mobility problems because of it ...

I could have a driving license but no car hence no need for a blue badge.

Why not? If you have mobility problems can you walk from a car park to the shops? 

A friend has a blue badge.

She has no car and no licence- ishe had to surrender it when she had a stroke. - but having a blue badge means her sister can take her shopping and park in disabled spaces , as friend has walking difficulty after her stroke. 

peteuk

tifo said:

For example, in mobility she asked if i can walk for 10 minutes (now seems like a trap question) and i said "yes but with a 5 min rest after 2-3 mins" so i'm only walking for 5 mins max, that's with the gout flare up and OA.

In the report she's said "able to walk around the block for 10 minutes" but in the FH she says "he stops a couple of times within the 10 minutes after 2-3 minutes he stopped for about 5 minutes" and in the activity report "able to mobilise further than 200 metres reliably". I know they don't include stops as a actual stop but even then i wouldn't walk 200 metres in 5 mins of actual walking, going slower and taking longer than a person without my issues.

Is it the case that if i take 30 mins to walk a distance but stop 3 times for 5 mins so actual walking is 15 mins they can say it was 30 minutes of walking and hence over 200 metres (which is why they say it).

The sections 'recommendation and evidence used' and 'reported restrictions not supported' seem to have the same text across all activities, as if it's been copied and pasted. This is why most have 'has driving license' and 'no blue badge' even where these are not relevant (to me).

It’s not a trap question, there is no such thing.  There are two ways at looking at how far a person can walk that's either distance or time.  Unless you state at what speed if they use time is it reasonable to say if you walk 5 minutes you’ll cover over 200 meters.  

If looking a distance I was taught to spiral out so inside the house, from chair to end of garden, bus stop or local shop.  The other thing to look at is a train carriage is approx 20 meters. Tescos shop front tends to be the same length.  

Yet again what you have said backs up what the assessment says.  You say you cant walk X distance but can walk 5 minutes without stopping.  You then have to rest for 2-3 minutes and then can walk again for 5 minutes.  To me that says you can stand independently and walk over 200 meters.