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.

Supersession mobility

xxgaynorxx

Hi. Has anybody ever asked DWP for a supersession/review due to case law.
I got 10points mobility (unable to plan journey as dont go out) decriptor 1E.
I feel i should have got 1F 12 points. On my pip2 and in my assessors report it says i only go out with my son. As i fear people will kill me.
There has been court cases since my award and i feel as though i should phone them and ask to review mobility.
As im asking because of case law will they review daily living too?
I could do with some expert advice on this or somebody who has been through similar.
As my award is for 10yrs im not due a review soon.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

CockneyRebel

Hi xxgaynorxx

I assume that you are refering to the recent UTT decision re the change made in march 2017

If this is the case then you do not need to do anything as the DWP are reviewing all claims affected. This is an enormous task and will take some time.

CR

xxgaynorxx

Yes i am. My claim and award was under the "old rules". End of 2015/beginning 2016. So i dont think i will be one of those that are reviewed. As i got 10 pts i feel they will just leave it at that and not get in touch.
Although i feel there was no clarity in the descriptor planning journeys right from the beginning of PIP in 2013.

CockneyRebel

Looking at what you have said 11E does not seem to have been applied correctly.
If the assessor has accepted that you go out but only with your son then 11E cannot apply as this refers to not being able to go out at all.
This would then leave a choice of 11D or 11F
I agree with you that if the only way you can leave your house on any journey is when you are accompanied then 11F should be the correct descriptor

I would suggest that CAB might be your best bet

CR

xxgaynorxx

Thankyou. I will ring them tommorrow.

BenefitsTrainingCo

xxgaynorxx,

The DWP have said they'll look at all claims where psychological distress should have resulted in more points in the mobility component. They've said they'll go back to November 2016, although arguably that's wrong and they should go back further. But even though your claim is older, it should still get reviewed. And you may have an argument that the case law (called MH) only clarified the law, it didn't change it. That would mean you should get any extra PIP going back to the beginning of your claim.

I don't think there's any way of speeding up the review process the DWP are carrying out, but it is worth getting advice about asking for a revision based on an error of law & arguing that it should go back further than November 2016.

There is case law (MH, the same case which led to the change in the law which was then itself found to be unlawful in another case) about when 11e or 11f should apply. That says that 1e applies if you can't follow a journey at all (even with another person). But you go out with your son, and can only do so with him, so it does seem 1f should apply.

Will

xxgaynorxx

Thankyou i will look into this. Sounds promising. Although im scared of rocking the boat. Do you know if i ask for a revision based on error of law will they look at my WHOLE claim again or just mobility? Thanks

xxgaynorxx

Have you got the links to relevant case laws please?

sandyp196

xxgaynorxx said:

Thankyou i will look into this. Sounds promising. Although im scared of rocking the boat. Do you know if i ask for a revision based on error of law will they look at my WHOLE claim again or just mobility? Thanks

They will look at the whole award. I am in the same position of whether to risk it. I have to make a decision by tommorow at the latest.