No PIP care component, epilepsy

Ralph

Hi, Just recieved pip assesent, no care, high mobilty award. 2-3 gran mal seizures per week, no warning. I thought the weighting of the 50% rule was being reduced in favor of safety. There was no mention of safety but the 50% rule was quoted. I’m not going to appeal, too afraid of losing the mobilty component and can’t wait a year for a risky tribunal. I was moving from DLA so have lost half the money i was previously getting. 

mikehughescq

It’s not a question of safety in isolation. It’s a question of the extent to which you get warnings.

Pippa_Scope

Welcome to the community @Ralph! So sorry to hear this, it's such a tricky decision to make and I'm sorry that you've been put in this position.

In case it's of any help, here is a list of extra money and support PIP entitles you to.

Ralph

Thanks, I can be thankful I got what I got. It seems the system is set up to deny help rather than help people who need help. I hope for everyone’s sake it’s changed soon. 

Yadnad

Ralph said:

It seems the system is set up to deny help rather than help people who need help.

Eerr of course it is. That and the purposely intended pressure to be applied to claimants that on a regular basis generally every 2/3 years you are required to re-prove your entitlement.

It is common knowledge that the idea behind PIP was the intention to reduce the then DLA budget by 20% - there was only way that could happen - make it more difficult for people to be awarded PIP - hence why they reduced the walking limit down to 20 metres from the previous DLA limit of 50 metres if you wanted the highest mobility award.

The government thought of every way that they could either to stop people claiming or put enough obstacles in their way so that they would give up.

It has worked in that people are giving up, people are not claiming it but would have claimed DLA.

Unfortunately the government has now found that the overall cost of PIP hasn't gone down as planned for - it has gone beyond the DLA budget. They have tried to tweek the descriptors to make it more difficult so all they are left with is how to stop Tribunals over ruling their decisions. The answer - do everything on line with no more physical face to face hearings other than by way of a TV screen.