PIPS Assessment results

[swifty]

Re: PIPS Assessment results

The decision was communicated to us verbally on the 3rd but still no letter yet, we have also sent an email to our local Labour MP but (probably because it isn't near an election) he's not replied.
the email was sent to him on the 15th, time will tell on that one

[charitynjw]

Re: PIPS Assessment results

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/n...ated-pip-rules

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/...2017/3375.html

[swifty]

Re: PIPS Assessment results

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/n...ated-pip-rules

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/...2017/3375.html

Thanks for the links, it'll be interesting to see what happens with the appeal court

We have finally got the letter off the DWP regarding the

mandatory reconsideration, the letter arrived on the 22nd December and is dated 20th December.
Although the original assessment remains the same the DWP did score her a '2' on Mixing with other people (scored out of 8), all the rest remain '0'
At least now we can print off the appeal form and submit it for tribunal

[swifty]

Re: PIPS Assessment results

Tribunal forms filled in and evidence added in the form of a cover letter explaining why the application is late.
Proof of Diagnoses from the NHS along with a paper from the National Autistic Society detailing the differences between male and female Autism.
And a breakdown of the original assessment that the DWP sent with the reconsideration results, hopefully this will go in our favour as (in my opinion) it shows that the assessment is not fit for purpose as the questions where aimed at physical disabilities not mental disabilities.

[enaid]

Re: PIPS Assessment results

As PIPS is all about how the condition affects daily living and not about the condition itself, having a diary and jotting down the things that cause problems will help you at the tribunal imo. It's always the little things we forget as just being part of daily living that others would have no problems with at all but for disabled people they can be a nightmare, but because they are accepted as part of our daily lives does not mean it is not a problem (hope that makes sense).

Once again Good Luck x

[swifty]

UPDATE
We received a letter on the 12th off the DWP of a copy of the their evidence they've submitting to the Tribunal 'WOW!' it's 144 pages long.
It's everything from the original assessment back in October right through to the mandatory reconsideration, it's the first time we've seen these in-depth assessment forms which is funny as they told us that the original assessment had been lost.
If we had all this we would have highlighted all the blatant lies when applying to the Tribunal, I feel this is a deliberate act on there part to make us look like we're being petty over their assessment.
The first few letters go through our arguments with their assessment stating that the assessor is a Health Professional and is a trained disability analist and is independent so has nothing to gain from the outcome.
They finish this argument by saying that they oppose this appeal and ask the Tribunal to dismiss the appeal and confirm the Secretary of State's decision.
They're trying to stop the Tribunal in it's tracks, do this?
Now we have the full assessment reports we can highlight everything that has been falsely entered whereas before we couldn't, do we have to wait until the hearing before bringing this up?

[enaid]

I think you will have to wait for the tribunal as it's pointless trying to argue with the DWP. At least you now have all the info they used against you so forewarned is forearmed. I know someone on PIP who as the letter stated if anyhting changes ie you get worse let us know asap. This she did as she has got considerably worse.PIP was stopped immediately, as if you tell them you are worse it becomes a whole new claim and is treated as such. So she gets nothing now as a new assessor gave her no points at all so she also is in for a tribunal. I really do not know how they work at all or indeed how they sleep at night tbh.
I have a daughter with severe learning difficulties, she is 42 and as you would expect been on DLAÂ* and income support all her adult life. Her turn for PIP came and I filled the form in as best I could. Got a phone call and went through the form thinking this was her assessment instead of a face to face. The next letter wasn't to state she was awarded PIP but that they needed more info. Got another letter saying they have the info, so still waiting fro decision. What an absolute waste of time effort and money as she can do very little for herself and has very little understanding and only 1 word speech. I wish now she had had a face to face then they could have seen how she really is.
Â*

[Amethyst]

Presumably you have read the RF judgment ( http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/...2017/3375.html ) Just as there's a fair bit in there about travelling and mental health conditions.

I don't know how these tribunals work, but if anything like court you might be able to submit a supplementary witness statement before the tribunal answering the further issues that have been raised by the document you have just received.

Did you manage to get some support ?

warwick65 enaid Kati

[swifty]

Presumably you have read the RF judgment ( http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/...2017/3375.html ) Just as there's a fair bit in there about travelling and mental health conditions.

I don't know how these tribunals work, but if anything like court you might be able to submit a supplementary witness statement before the tribunal answering the further issues that have been raised by the document you have just received.

Did you manage to get some support ?

warwick65 enaid Kati

I had a go at reading the RF Judgement but TBH all the legal jargon clouded over it all and I couldn't make any sense out of it, however! I wonder if I could use this Judgement as part of our defence.
We don't know how we could submit a supplementary witness statement or what that involves, we will try and highlight all the lies they have submitted and give the Tribunal the true version but I fear this will take up most of the day and I don't think we'll be given the time to do this.

BTW I have seen todays BBC news report on the PIPS assessment and the misery it's causing, the BBC have revealed the 1.6 million claims will have to be reviewed again for people who had their DLA reduced. don't think that figure includes people who have been refused DLA for new claims though

[Amethyst]

Quick Summary here might be useful - seems particularly relevant to one of the points you made about the assessment - https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/n...ated-pip-rules

Background

From 16 March 2017, new PIP regulations prevented an award of the enhanced PIP mobility rate in cases where someone cannot follow the route of a familiar journey without another person unless it is “for reasons other than psychological distress”.

This meant that those with serious mental health conditions, who are unable to plan or undertake a journey because of overwhelming psychological distress were only entitled to a lower level of support, if any. The High Court decision

The Public Law Project’s client, RF, won on all three grounds of her challenge to these changes.

The High Court Judge:

• quashed the new regulations because they discriminate against those with disabilities in breach of Human Rights Act 1998 obligations
• declared that the Secretary of State did not have lawful power to make the regulations (i.e. they were ‘ultra vires’) and should have consulted before making them

RF’s claim was supported by The National Autistic Society, Inclusion London, Revolving Doors and Disability Rights UK, Mind and the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

Read Public Law Project press release

Read judgment - RF v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

[swifty]

Thanks for that AMETHYST, I've copied both your summary and the High Court paper onto word.
I'll print it all off and hopefully be able to use this at the Tribunal

[swifty]

I see Esther McVey the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions took it to the 11th hour with appeal decision, she had until the 19th Jan 2018 and she released her decision to the House on the 19th Jan 2018 NOT to appeal the High Courts judgment

[enaid]

Article on the decision not to appeal http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42745616

I really hope no one puts a feather in Ms McVeys cap over this as she is one to watch for all disabled people and carers.

Ms McVey is disliked by many across Merseyside and the country after her controversial stint as Minister for Disabled people - and for being a key advocate in launching the hated ‘Bedroom Tax’ - which resulted in many vulnerable people losing their homes. More on that and her policies on here https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news...-role-14223696

She is IMHO simply horrible.

[enaid]

Interesting article https://www.disabledgo.com/blog/2017.../#.Wp1SaOjFKUk

[swifty]

Article on the decision not to appeal http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42745616

I really hope no one puts a feather in Ms McVeys cap over this as she is one to watch for all disabled people and carers.

Ms McVey is disliked by many across Merseyside and the country after her controversial stint as Minister for Disabled people - and for being a key advocate in launching the hated ‘Bedroom Tax’ - which resulted in many vulnerable people losing their homes. More on that and her policies on here https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news...-role-14223696

She is IMHO simply horrible.

Yep! that is exactly what we've experienced, all out lies from the assessor.

We just called the Tribunal to find out when we will here from them as it's been 12 weeks since they sent out a letter to us confirming the case will be going to Tribunal, they said because of the unusual high numbers of cases they have to hear there is a 35 week waiting time so we should hear something mid summer.
This is outrageous! I know it's not the Tribunals fault, they are the ones who are overworked by the DWP's cost cutting agenda.
But the question is "who is paying for all these Tribunals" surely it's costing more to process claims this way rather than actually assessing claimants correctly in the first place..