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.

They reduced my PIP claim but weren't accurate on forms

kathy001

Hi I’m new here, I have been reading your stories about the lies the accessors tell, I have copd depression lumps in my knees etc, have been on the best medication available for my breathing but nothing stops me from been out of breath and my depression is worse due to this, I applied for pip in 2016 and was awarded the low mobility rate, I wasn’t happy as I needed help with everything and couldn’t walk without gasping for breath, I asked for reconsideration and they didn’t change there decision, so I started tribunal action, 3 days before my court date I had a call from pip, they awarded me standard care and enhanced mobility, I got a mobility car as I needed this for appointments etc, beginning of 2017 I received the forms to fill in again, and a mp was sent out to my home, she didn’t examine me as she said I can clearly see you are struggling, she asked what medication I was on and was handed my prescription, while she was here I was crying also as I suffer from depression which my condition makes worse as I know I will only get worse, she was here about half a hour I told her I needed help with all daily activities etc, I didn’t move of the sofa the whole time she was here, I received my decision letter, they have reduced my payments to low rate mobility as she stated that I could stand unaided and walk when she observed this which is all lies as I said I wasn’t even asked to stand up, she also said I didn’t have a wheeze which is also lies as I am always wheezing and breathless also on the report she said I didn’t take medication for depression when it was there in black and white on my prescription, I am now to give my car back, and feel I can no longer cope with this as I went through all the stress a year before, my depression it really bad with all the stress with these people lieing, pip supposed to help you with your independence the only independence I had has now been taken because of people you trust lieing

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Chloe_Alumni

Hi @kathy001 and a very warm welcome to the community. Thank you for sharing this with us all and I am sorry this has happened. I know that applying is stressful enough, without having your added difficulties. I hope the community are able to provide some advice and guidance on this. In the meantime, please do have a look around the community and get involve with anything you would like

If you need anything else then please just ask!

markyboy

I am presuming you were re examined around 12 months before your award ended and they have superseded that award by reducing your mobility
The DWP must give a reason and explain what circumstances led to the reduction of the award they cannot just say it has changed because of a review if it goes to appeal and you lose and they do not state the reasons to a tribunal you can appeal on a point of law
This happened to me and in the end i was successful

Yadnad

markyboy said:

I am presuming you were re examined around 12 months before your award ended and they have superseded that award by reducing your mobility
The DWP must give a reason and explain what circumstances led to the reduction of the award they cannot just say it has changed because of a review if it goes to appeal and you lose and they do not state the reasons to a tribunal you can appeal on a point of law
This happened to me and in the end i was successful

I would imagine that the circumstances were that a report was prepared part way through an award period (to just check that that the right amount was being paid - too much or too little) by the assessor which indicated that the current award was woefully wrong?
The PIP regulations allow for a review at any time.

If your argument holds any water the DWP would have to prove why there is a change up or down of a current award.

In effect everybody that on review that has a different award could challenge the DWP simply by having to have the DWP prove why it led to that change - the onus on appeal would land on the DWP and not on the claimant.

Personally I cannot see such challenges on what you have said would hold any water.

curiousgirl96

Hello!

Honestly I’m sorry to hear that. When were you re examined by the DWP? Have you been given a good reason or not? Can you appeal the decision or not?

wanderinggal

These ATOS people are unspeakable Swear words . You'll have to appeal I know it takes a lot of energy and frustration but this is what they want people to not apply keep themselves in a job and make life harder than it already is . Report this person stating you never moved off the sofa and always take their names . " Every pound counts" may help contact as they can maybe visit at home not sure though funds cut all over ?

wanderinggal

Because they get bonuses to agreen to less people getting benefit it was on panorama a few years back the ESA scandal . ATOS are still running departments and contracts admittedly for PIP and DLA but they get bonus for not agreeing to give you disability money . Don't think the system works like a normal person would run it . It's about saving money and belittling disabled people getting is all off onto the private schemes and get us into work even if you can not cope with it . This is the reason not because they care they have to lie

wanderinggal

I didn't create that madness they do it themselves . And people work for them to probably top up their wages I'm not sure why they would do this needless to say they have a monetary bonus system to only pass 2 claimants maybe it keeps tribunals busy ? Why anything in this whole system makes any sense try working out the reason and wherefore of red tape who knows I ain't got the time to decipher why they do this but they do and it's been proved on panorama I've had this 2 times in my experience and due to deal withe these expletives again very soon. They are slippery trying to catch those out that try cheat system while those who do need it have to struggle . But as I say again why should they care when they getting their paycheck and small piece of power .

Yadnad

Username_removed said:

@markyboy is correct. Burden of proof always falls on the party seeking to change a decision. Always has. The inability to discharge the burden of proof is precisely why the success rate at appeal is so high.

You learn something new every day.
From what you say Mike, it is for the DWP to show that on the balance of probabilities the new decision is correct?? Which normally is the new assessors report.
Please have patience with me here. Here we are sat with the Tribunal, no one from the DWP turns up. The claimant is the only witness.

If the onus is on the DWP purely and simply and they have given their side with the new evidence being the assessors report. Should not the DWP's evidence be tested for accuracy by the Tribunal? Why should the claimant's case be tested as they haven't changed anything - the DWP have?
.
Yet when people appeal they are told that it is they that have to show on the balance of probabilities that their argument using evidence is the right one??

I'm totally confused - sorry, but at an appeal hearing who the hell has to prove what??

Liam_Alumni

Hi @Kathy001,

I'm sorry to hear about all the issues you're having with PIP. Have you considered appealing the decision? Citizens Advice have lots of helpful information about appealing a DWP benefits decision on their website, and we also have some videos about the appeals process online too - including the Mandatory Reconsideration process.

I hope this helps!

Yadnad

Username_removed said:

No easy answer I’m afraid. Varies with the case and the evidence. In your example what should happen is as you describe. Burden of proof on DWP to show grounds for supersession before you get into a discussion on the merits of the case. In reality a lot of tribunals go straight to merits and thus commit an error of law.

Thanks Mike. I understand now what should happen as opposed to what generally happens. So if the DWP's evidence is based solely on the assessors report AND that you can show that the opinion of the assessor is completely wrong based on facts then the case should fall on that alone as the DWP have not proven their case to supersede. The DWP would have to show why they believe that say High Mobility previously should now be no mobility - what has so radically changed.

Even if the claimant wins on that point there would be nothing stopping the DWP from starting again with another re-assessment & face to face until they win eventually.