We want to hear from you: please tell us about your experience of the online community.
Squeakypips said: @erm : from my vast experience of one phone assessment, and one they couldn't be bothered to do, my judgment is that they're flipping awful. They (and whoever they passed the report on to) didn't know what common drug was for and told me I wasn't taking a relevant one. They asked if I could use a bath. I said no, because I can't stop myself falling, and have hurt myself, da da da...They said in their report that I can use a bath.The said I'd claimed that I need help with budgeting.No, I didn't. (Maths degree, & still teacing A levels as a hobby).Anxiety stops me doing something, and they replied that my problem on that is to do with mobility, so no points.I got a page from my GP, which included "He cannot safely walk 20 metres". Thankfully they took notice of that. Unfortunately they ignored most of the rest of the text. Including the bit about not being able to use a bath, again.They appear to ignore the requirement that you need to be able to do things in no more than twice the normal max time ("reasonable" is established in case law as less than this), which would mean granting a lot of people a lot of points - ooh dear can't do that.It's not a competent system, it's not fit for purpose. The only redeeming thing is that the Tribunals seem (I've spent hours reading transcripts) to sort things out fairly often, but there are places where the lawyers point out that the wording of the PIP questions is just plain wrong. It obviously wasn't written by a lawyer. It needs redoing. Experienced folk seem to agree it's a bit of a lottery, so if it doesn't work at first, roll the dice at the next level up. E.g, there are several where the Upper Tribunal rules that the lower tribunal was wrong, and sends it back................. Good luck.
jw68 said: Squeakypips said: @erm : from my vast experience of one phone assessment, and one they couldn't be bothered to do, my judgment is that they're flipping awful. They (and whoever they passed the report on to) didn't know what common drug was for and told me I wasn't taking a relevant one. They asked if I could use a bath. I said no, because I can't stop myself falling, and have hurt myself, da da da...They said in their report that I can use a bath.The said I'd claimed that I need help with budgeting.No, I didn't. (Maths degree, & still teacing A levels as a hobby).Anxiety stops me doing something, and they replied that my problem on that is to do with mobility, so no points.I got a page from my GP, which included "He cannot safely walk 20 metres". Thankfully they took notice of that. Unfortunately they ignored most of the rest of the text. Including the bit about not being able to use a bath, again.They appear to ignore the requirement that you need to be able to do things in no more than twice the normal max time ("reasonable" is established in case law as less than this), which would mean granting a lot of people a lot of points - ooh dear can't do that.It's not a competent system, it's not fit for purpose. The only redeeming thing is that the Tribunals seem (I've spent hours reading transcripts) to sort things out fairly often, but there are places where the lawyers point out that the wording of the PIP questions is just plain wrong. It obviously wasn't written by a lawyer. It needs redoing. Experienced folk seem to agree it's a bit of a lottery, so if it doesn't work at first, roll the dice at the next level up. E.g, there are several where the Upper Tribunal rules that the lower tribunal was wrong, and sends it back................. Good luck. Yup.They were so bad they had to change their name from ATOS to what it is now...(I.A.S)
erm said: jw68 said: Squeakypips said: @erm : from my vast experience of one phone assessment, and one they couldn't be bothered to do, my judgment is that they're flipping awful. They (and whoever they passed the report on to) didn't know what common drug was for and told me I wasn't taking a relevant one. They asked if I could use a bath. I said no, because I can't stop myself falling, and have hurt myself, da da da...They said in their report that I can use a bath.The said I'd claimed that I need help with budgeting.No, I didn't. (Maths degree, & still teacing A levels as a hobby).Anxiety stops me doing something, and they replied that my problem on that is to do with mobility, so no points.I got a page from my GP, which included "He cannot safely walk 20 metres". Thankfully they took notice of that. Unfortunately they ignored most of the rest of the text. Including the bit about not being able to use a bath, again.They appear to ignore the requirement that you need to be able to do things in no more than twice the normal max time ("reasonable" is established in case law as less than this), which would mean granting a lot of people a lot of points - ooh dear can't do that.It's not a competent system, it's not fit for purpose. The only redeeming thing is that the Tribunals seem (I've spent hours reading transcripts) to sort things out fairly often, but there are places where the lawyers point out that the wording of the PIP questions is just plain wrong. It obviously wasn't written by a lawyer. It needs redoing. Experienced folk seem to agree it's a bit of a lottery, so if it doesn't work at first, roll the dice at the next level up. E.g, there are several where the Upper Tribunal rules that the lower tribunal was wrong, and sends it back................. Good luck. Yup.They were so bad they had to change their name from ATOS to what it is now...(I.A.S) He can't do physical work anymore so limited on what he can do
poppy123456 said: erm said: jw68 said: Squeakypips said: @erm : from my vast experience of one phone assessment, and one they couldn't be bothered to do, my judgment is that they're flipping awful. They (and whoever they passed the report on to) didn't know what common drug was for and told me I wasn't taking a relevant one. They asked if I could use a bath. I said no, because I can't stop myself falling, and have hurt myself, da da da...They said in their report that I can use a bath.The said I'd claimed that I need help with budgeting.No, I didn't. (Maths degree, & still teacing A levels as a hobby).Anxiety stops me doing something, and they replied that my problem on that is to do with mobility, so no points.I got a page from my GP, which included "He cannot safely walk 20 metres". Thankfully they took notice of that. Unfortunately they ignored most of the rest of the text. Including the bit about not being able to use a bath, again.They appear to ignore the requirement that you need to be able to do things in no more than twice the normal max time ("reasonable" is established in case law as less than this), which would mean granting a lot of people a lot of points - ooh dear can't do that.It's not a competent system, it's not fit for purpose. The only redeeming thing is that the Tribunals seem (I've spent hours reading transcripts) to sort things out fairly often, but there are places where the lawyers point out that the wording of the PIP questions is just plain wrong. It obviously wasn't written by a lawyer. It needs redoing. Experienced folk seem to agree it's a bit of a lottery, so if it doesn't work at first, roll the dice at the next level up. E.g, there are several where the Upper Tribunal rules that the lower tribunal was wrong, and sends it back................. Good luck. Yup.They were so bad they had to change their name from ATOS to what it is now...(I.A.S) He can't do physical work anymore so limited on what he can do PIP isn't about your ability to work.
erm said: jw68 said: Squeakypips said: @erm : from my vast experience of one phone assessment, and one they couldn't be bothered to do, my judgment is that they're flipping awful. They (and whoever they passed the report on to) didn't know what common drug was for and told me I wasn't taking a relevant one. They asked if I could use a bath. I said no, because I can't stop myself falling, and have hurt myself, da da da...They said in their report that I can use a bath.The said I'd claimed that I need help with budgeting.No, I didn't. (Maths degree, & still teacing A levels as a hobby).Anxiety stops me doing something, and they replied that my problem on that is to do with mobility, so no points.I got a page from my GP, which included "He cannot safely walk 20 metres". Thankfully they took notice of that. Unfortunately they ignored most of the rest of the text. Including the bit about not being able to use a bath, again.They appear to ignore the requirement that you need to be able to do things in no more than twice the normal max time ("reasonable" is established in case law as less than this), which would mean granting a lot of people a lot of points - ooh dear can't do that.It's not a competent system, it's not fit for purpose. The only redeeming thing is that the Tribunals seem (I've spent hours reading transcripts) to sort things out fairly often, but there are places where the lawyers point out that the wording of the PIP questions is just plain wrong. It obviously wasn't written by a lawyer. It needs redoing. Experienced folk seem to agree it's a bit of a lottery, so if it doesn't work at first, roll the dice at the next level up. E.g, there are several where the Upper Tribunal rules that the lower tribunal was wrong, and sends it back................. Good luck. Yup.They were so bad they had to change their name from ATOS to what it is now...(I.A.S) Well! That has really made us more stressed than before, Hope yours was not the norm! hope you got sorted eventually ok. He can't do physical work anymore so limited on what he can do, which stresses him out already, so was hoping this assessment would not be stressful
The value must be greater than or equal to 1.
Get more out of your online community by signing in or registering