PIP Assessment Cancelled

Talula1993 · 5 January 2019 at 3:16PM

Yes I agree with that, but I don't think that's the fault of the AHP as such (the bra bit is obviously plain sillines) but given that they generally have 30 minutes to fill in about 15 pages there are some slip of pen errors and some generic phrases churned out for each person, things do obviously go wrong but for the truly important bits they focus more detail and make it person specific. I think the fault is the DWP who expects sometimes for one person to see up to 6 people a day and over books appointments. With 3-4 a day far better quality reports will be produced.

Talula1993 · 5 January 2019 at 3:21PM

Sorry fairly new and not grasped quoting. Those comments were responses to poppy and Alice!

GlasweJen · 5 January 2019 at 4:30PM

Talula you're talking nonsense. I'm a paraplegic and my medical assessment said I walked up a flight of stairs, I can assure you that I didn't! The nurse also said that his wife once fainted and ended up in an ambulance and he was so scared and blah blah blah but somehow I was expected to just get up and get on with life despite having a condition where my blood pressure bottoms out and I lose consciousness several times a week.

The tribunal, based on the medical evidence that the nurse had also had at his assessment, didn't even sit at a panel, one came out and apologised and they sent me straight home with a fair award which was a world away from the double zero score that the nurse plucked out the air.

At the second assessment the physiotherapist managed to work out that wheelchair = not a walker (felt like sending her a well done letter) but she managed to miss out the fact I can't stand up so apparently I have a shower every morning and stand in a bath! Can't remember the rest but it was an embarrassment to common sense, mandatory reconsideration sorted that one out but it really makes you think that the good professionals stay in the services and the rubbish ones pimp themselves out to these ATOS (or equivalent) services.

Talula1993 · 5 January 2019 at 5:00PM

Glaswejen I'm not talking nonsense. A handful of bad experiences is not gospel and represenative of everyone's experiences. I work in the auditing of assessments and learning for new starters, so yes I do know what I'm talking about. Jesus some people can be so rude on these forums, completely unnecessary. I merely explained the process of assessments, someone reports a difficulty with a task, the assessors job is to find 2 or 3 pieces of evidence to back that up, whether that's doctors reports, medications, physical assessment etc, if they can't find the evidence the DWP will just throw the report back and say that the claiments restrictions aren't justified. I did not claim that it is perfect system and nothing goes wrong! Things go wrong because the assessors have an obscene case load which I hope will change. What i claimed is that the job tries to give a fair representative and the auditing process is improving so there's progressively less and less mistakes slipping through the net, the majority of people who really need it, get it, but yes there are mistakes made but this is not for the majority of people.

poppy12345 · 5 January 2019 at 5:15PM

You really are talking complete nonsense! PIP isn't about a diagnosis, so i have no idea what you're talking about with that statement.

Fair and understanding, HCP's? That's quite funny when so many people have so many lies told in their reports. Things that didn't actually happen during the assessment. Being called a female, when you're a male,walking up stairs when it would be physically impossible for the claimant to do such a thing??? come on!

As Alice pointed out, 71% of those that appear in person win their Tribunal.... need we say anymore about those HCP's...................I think not.

Alice_Holt · 5 January 2019 at 5:29PM

Talula1993 wrote: »

...but given that they generally have 30 minutes to fill in about 15 pages there are some slip of pen errors and some generic phrases churned out for each person, things do obviously go wrong but for the truly important bits they focus more detail and make it person specific. I think the fault is the DWP who expects sometimes for one person to see up to 6 people a day and over books appointments. With 3-4 a day far better quality reports will be produced...the assessors have an obscene case load ...

That's the difficulty with a system brought in to reduce the welfare bill.

Under DLA the decision was made by a decision maker based on a report from GP's / Consultants / Medical Professional's who were aware of the claimants medical history; together with the claimants written report of how their disability affected in daily life.
Such a GP's or CPN's report is exactly, "there needs to be information to back that up, whether that's medication, medical reports, specialist involvement, how they present etc.", what you suggested should be in place in your earlier post.

The prescriptive points-based system now in place relies on a short assessment by a "HCP" who may not be experienced in the claimants medical condition, and who has, by your account, only 2 minutes per page to complete their report.
It's scarcely surprising mistakes are made, and the costs of such a short sighted regime passed back to the claimant, their family, the NHS, the Tribunal Service (who have c. a 9 month waiting list of pending appeals).
A colleague has a client with severe mental health issues, for whom she has now submitted 3 consequent successful appeals to the TS.The panel place the claimant in the Support Group, 2 years on the client is reassessed, declared fit for work. We help client with an appeal - client placed in SG - 2 years another reassessment finds the client fit for work - etc,etc. Three times in succession and counting!
That really doesn't help anyone - unfortunately rushed and incompetent assessments together with very poor DWP decision making seem common.

Talula1993 · 5 January 2019 at 5:57PM

Poppy. You are talking to someone who works in the service, so I can categorically say diagnosis does matter. If someone said "I can't dress myself" but had no explanation as to why, and their response was "just can't" when asked why, no one's going to go "fair enough have this money" but it someone says they can't dress them selves because they have COPD and it makes them too out of breath, then we would think fair enough that is reasonable.

What is meant by diagnosis doesn't matter is that some conditions cause very few functional impairments, e.g high blood pressure for example. But there has to a realistic probability that the condition someone has would cause some of the difficulties that they are reporting.

The ones that go to mandatory reconsideration are the ones declined. Where i work last week 80% of claimants were scored and entitled. Mistakes are made, that is life. Everyone will focus on the negatives. 5 people could be assessed, have a fair and accurate assessment and get what they are dersved. Then one person comes along, gets what they perceive as an incorrect score and everyone will just disregard the 5 positive stories and only voice and discuss the one negative then tarnishing the whole service as a disgrace. While I agree no mistakes should be made, unfortunately they do.

But no one here is doing the OP any favours, she already has doubts about claiming for her daughter and everyone is basically saying "well since I had a bad experience you definitely will to"

I stand by what I said, if you have any evidence and your daughter and your self can explain reasons why she is struggling with certain aspects of daily living then theres a chance youll be entitled, anyway I wish you the best of luck

I'm not here to argue. I was offering support to the OP on the process of the service and from MY personal experience seeing mainly fair practice. I'm sorry people have negative experience I really am I hate to see people struggle. But please, I am not talking nonsense I literally go through the scoring criteria everyday. I see the negative and the positive. I'm not disillusioned.

Alice_Holt · 5 January 2019 at 6:09PM

Talula1993 wrote: »

... I work in the auditing of assessments and learning for new starters, so yes I do know what I'm talking about. .. and the auditing process is improving...

I'd be interested to know how successful MR's and tribunal appeals are covered in the audit process.
- Are these included in the audit?
- is there any feedback / training for the HCP concerned?

It would seem sensible that such flawed assessments are reviewed, and lessons learnt. Does this happen, and what is the process?

Do you have contact / feedback from the TS?
Especially given these comments:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/emilydugan/most-dwp-benefits-cases-which-reach-court-are-based-on-bad

poppy12345 · 5 January 2019 at 6:42PM

Talula1993 wrote: »

Poppy. You are talking to someone who works in the service, so I can categorically say diagnosis does matter. If someone said "I can't dress myself" but had no explanation as to why, and their response was "just can't" when asked why, no one's going to go "fair enough have this money" but it someone says they can't dress them selves because they have COPD and it makes them too out of breath, then we would think fair enough that is reasonable.

Naturally, if someone turns around and says this it's no wonder they're refused. Explaining why you have those problems then there's more chance of someone being successful but i still disagree with you that PIP is about a diagnosis because it's not.

I know someone very close to me that claimed PIP a year ago and had no diagnosis at all. Had lots of problem with daily activities and needs support to even get through the day, every single day of the week. Awarded successfully Enhanced in both parts.

That's all i have to say on the subject and i wish you a good evening.

Talula1993 · 5 January 2019 at 6:55PM

Sorry Alice I don't really know much about the reconsiderations, once the assessments are sent that's where my knowledge ends. I know the senior management get all the feedback and adjust the criterias and in-house training accordingly under direction from.the DWP. In the last 12 months the In house auditing has gone up dramatically though, a lot of assessments are read through, scrutinised and are given back to the AP to make amendments before they reach the DWP, this reducing silly errors and inconsistencies

This is where I work though I think a lot of assessment centres are ran differently

PIP Assessment Cancelled

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free