SOR and aPaper Based Assessment

kah22

I expect my friends brown envelope to drop through the letterbox any day now.

Her assessment for the DLA to PIP change was paper based and from all that I’ve read we’ll probably want to look closely at some descriptors and how they were scored, especially mobility, before deciding if it is worth going for a MR (her condition is bipolar 1)

Considering it was a paper based assessmen can you tell me what we should ask for and what we don’t need to ask for? Any templates you can point me to?

As always many thanks

 

Kevin

kah22

I’ve three questions about mobility, can anyone answer these.

My friend goes to church, takes part in the service, and returns home.  Would that be regarded as 1 OR 2 journeys with a break inbetween?

My friend enters the church but because of psychological pressure.had to leave during the service would that be one journey or two?

Or again my friend goes goes to church but because she hasn’t got someone to sit with her turns and goes home

What would be the most effective way of putting this point across and what descriptor might it be classed as?

To put a little flesh on the question I should say that my friend is a committed RC and attendance at Sunday service is very important to her

Kevin

maid08

if she goes to church its a journey so two in fact there and back  she can plan and cpmplete so thats one with no points ?mobility  she can by going to church  walk more than 200mtres  realibily  and safly so thats another fail the third  could she cope with it   i cant see them accepting she went but could not stay ??myself  i would concider she always gets taken and supported  thru service as a firm beleaver  she cant miss a service regardless plus church support her as well plus it will show she can mix with others and talk to others without an assistant

maid08

Username_removed said:

Not that straightforward. The time it takes to complete the journey remains relevant. Going to a place and meeting people does not of itself demonstrate social engagement. There’s already decent caselaw on that relating to pub visits.

thats intresting point can u give a link to that purely for my info and my case ?as it stated i enjoyed seeing my son and landlady ?so could mix no prob ??that was acessers decision

kah22

Username_removed said:

Not that straightforward. The time it takes to complete the journey remains relevant. Going to a place and meeting people does not of itself demonstrate social engagement. There’s already decent caselaw on that relating to pub visits.

Yes, might be worth reading and thanks to those who defined journey, I had a feeling it would be two journeys

CockneyRebel

Username_removed said:

Not that straightforward. The time it takes to complete the journey remains relevant. Going to a place and meeting people does not of itself demonstrate social engagement. There’s already decent caselaw on that relating to pub visits.

however, being p***ed and not being  able to navigate will not hold up

CR

keira

Username_removed said:

FWIW going out is 1 journey and coming back is another. The number of journeys is irrelevant. What matters is that you’ve just done a distance repeatedly. If being unable to do a distance is then ruled out all you’re left with is whether the journey can be done reliably, safely or in a reasonable time.

Mike, what do you mean by FWIW?