lies or mistakes thru lack of training or could not care as long as they get paid on result

Yadnad

Username_removed said:

Here’s what the guidance says about taking someone with you.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-assessment-guide-for-assessment-providers

It’s very poor practice generally in any health setting to not address the patient/claimant when they’re sat in front of you. If there are specific triggers it’s up to a claimant to have explained them in a claim pack else how would a HCP know? 

I think of it in H&S terms. Many people want employers to manage risk down to zero when that is physically impossible. Similarly, many patients want nothing to do with a process which may trigger them and act as though as long as DWP don’t trigger them then all is well when in fact lots of things could trigger them every day and yet they don’t avoid them. It’s a bit like the “I need a home visit because I don’t go out” which often, not always, translates as “going out triggers me so I only do it when I have to. I don’t like benefit related stuff and I don’t think this is a “have to” scenario.” Er, yes, it is.

Thanks Mike. First off, I thought I knew what there was to know about PIP before I joined this website. Now I realise I knew very little. Everything I now know has come from being on here.

As for having someone with me, yes I did take my wife with me to the first assessment. We both sat down and then I went to the desk to sign in. Doing that I asked the woman if my wife was needed to be with me at the assessment. She told me that there was no need to actually go in with me. So I went in on my own as I did for the second and third assessments. Only recently finding out that she really should have gone with me as I do not open up to strangers until I have the measure of them - it's a self protection thing.

As I have said I have never had an assessment where it has been a two way discussion
Now I find the following guidance that the assessor should follow but didn't.

1.6.8 The approach should be relaxed, allowing the claimant time and encouraging them to talk about themselves and put across the impact of their health condition or disability in their own words. The claimant and any companion should feel fully involved in the process and feel that the consultation is a genuine two-way process. Summarising back to the claimant what has been said is useful to show active listening and to ensure that key pieces of information have been correctly heard.

No idea why my assessments were carried out the way they were.

As for laying out what triggers there are with me would probably end up with the assessor refusing to see me on the grounds on her/his safety. I certainly wouldn't want to describe what I get like and what could happen - one of the reasons why I have been previously sectioned - not so much for my safety but for those around me.

Now having said that are you saying that that is exactly what I should have put out before the assessment process?

Yadnad

Username_removed said:

Hard as it may seem, yes. Unless there’s some other contemporaneous documentary evidence then what chance has a HCP got? They can’t mind read. Had you opened up or your wife been in the room you’d possibly be on PIP now and, given what you’ve said, you’d be a paper only assessment too.

Granted good tribunals are good at bringing this stuff out better than HCPs bit that’s a training and life experience issue (so back to my earlier post about why a HCP might do what they do). A tribunal judge has at least 10 years experience as a practising solicitor before they even get to enter a tribunal room and so on. The problem as I see it is that, albeit understandably, people attack the person they interact with and lose sight of the fact that the real problem is not a “liar” blah blah blah but the process.

Maybe Mike, but I say again, all three assessors did not conduct the assessments in accordance with what their guidance tells them. They clearly were not interested in wanting any input from me other than to agree with comments and opinions that they had already formed. There were no two way conversations, there were no open questions asked. Even after a short while it was plainly obvious to me that I had to keep my mouth shut whilst they conducted the assessment their way.
Now I do admit to the feeling of my anger rising at times in that I had to sit there whilst they judged me but thankfully I was able to control myself.
As I have also said I was green to the whole system. I had no help and received no prior advice as to what I could or couldn't do.
The receptionist was clear in her statement that my wife would not need to go in with me - it was only myself they wanted to talk to .I couldn't start calling her a liar nor could I quote from assessors guidance; we just accepted what she said, trusting that she knew what she was saying and us trusting in the system.

Anyhow all of this is in the past now but as I have said I have learned more in the past few weeks about this subject than in the 5 years that I have been fighting the system.
Maybe those that do look and persevere looking for the advice and help are doing the right thing - my way in just accepting the first thing that is said (ie no room at the inn by the CAB) was plain stupid - I will have to live with that.

feir

Wasn't even for a home visit, it was for me to go to an assessment centre. Had to humiliate myself by explaining why i need a home visit now, this stuff is getting easier the more i do it though. Just got to accept that being disabled = explaining myself in ways i am uncomfortable with.