nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

We want to hear from you: please tell us about your experience of the online community.

pip award descriptors

michael_m

Just looking for what people think about the following, regarding pip descriptors.

I have been awarded pip 'enhanced' for mobility on the basis the dwp have concluded that i can walk '1 to 20 metres'.

This is thus meaning, from the perspective of the dwp I can walk 1 to 20 metres as defined by the reliability criteria.

However, this is not an accurate reflection of my ability to walk, medical evidence has shown that although I can walk upto 340 metres which takes me 11 minutes to manage, I am clearly not doing this as defined (within a reasonable time), thus as I cant walk this distance as defined I actually CANT walk 1 to 20 metres (within a reasonable time).

I know that this is the most severe walking ability descriptor, but as it isnt actually a accurate reflection of my inability to walk (cant walk ANY distance within a reasonable time) does anybody agree with me there should be an additional descriptor indicating a persons inability to walk AT ALL as defined by the reliability criteria

just wondering what people think about this

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Moonpixiewitch

Hi, I think there are many areas of potential improvement on the descriptors in the current PIP forms . However I am not inclined to waste any of the very little energy I have in letting them know my opinion on the matter . Frustrating though it is .

rubin16

If we did that for every descriptor, there would be over 100 of them. Descriptors are meant to be a broad range that most fit into.

MyHappy256

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/137207/pip-award-descriptors

Thank you, that actually helps me a lot when filling in my form, because my ability to walk has improved, sort of, but it takes me 6 times longer and I am in constant pain, plus it causes my feet to swell up and I have to spend the day in my hospital bed at home.

So I was thinking before filling in the form, gosh, I might actually lose my enhanced mobility because I can do short walks, though there are other days when I cannot walk at all.

rubin16

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1053824#Comment_1053824

When doing your PIP form, you write down how things affect you as if its your worst day. so If you can manage to walk some days and not others, just put what your days are like when you can't walk.

Kimi87

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1053824#Comment_1053824

With PIP if you cannot do an activity reliably, repeatedly, safely and in a reasonable time frame for more than 51% of the time, you are treated as unable to do the activity at all.

chiarieds

Hi @michael_m - if we look at the descriptors for this activity:

a. Can stand and then move more than 200 metres, either aided or unaided. 0 points.
b. Can stand and then move more than 50 metres but no more than 200 metres, either aided or unaided. 4 points.
c. Can stand and then move unaided more than 20 metres but no more than 50 metres. 8 points.
d. Can stand and then move using an aid or appliance more than 20 metres but no more than 50 metres. 10 points.
e. Can stand and then move more than 1 metre but no more than 20 metres, either aided or unaided. 12 points.
f. Cannot, either aided or unaided, –
(i) stand; or
(ii) move more than 1 metre. 12 points.

I believe the difficulties you face with walking have been accurately reflected with the points you have received for e.

f. is for those who are literally unable to put one foot in front of the other or even stand. This you can do, but rather than saying a. applies, as you can actually walk more than 200m, because you can't do so 'reliably' as it takes you more than twice as long as someone without your disability, then they have instead awarded 12 points with e.

I agree that you can't walk any distance reliably, but even if there were an addditional descriptor to cover this 12 points are also given for those unable to walk at all, so I'm unsure an extra descriptor is therefore needed. Reliability is something they should always bear in mind, after they've first looked at how far you can physically walk.

As another example, I also received points for e. because I'm in pain the moment I'm upright & like yourself can walk, albeit it more slowly. So even tho I'm in pain just standing, I feel the correct points were awarded because I can physically walk, but, because I can't do so 'reliably,' e. was awarded.

I hope that makes sense!

michael_m

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1053834#Comment_1053834

You are missing the point,

By stating I can walk 1 to 20 metres is indicating I am able to do this 'reliably/as defined by the reliability criteria' and this is not the case.

I do accept that if there were to be a descriptor for 'is unable to walk ANY DISTANCE, as defined the awarded points would still be the same (maximum amount), but my post was not about having a descriptor that would get a claimant more points, it is about having a descriptor that more accuratley reflects a individuals ability to walk

thanks

Component react.suggestedcontent had an error.

The value must be greater than or equal to 1.

Sign in or register for free

Get more out of your online community by signing in or registering