If this is your first visit, check out the community guide. You will have to Join us or Sign in before you can post.
The dwp how you don’t stand a chance
Bomf
Member Posts: 4 Listener
I recently had my pip claim denied when I phoned them and asked who they wrote to or called about my condition I was told it was confidential so I pressed a little harder and was told they would have wrote to them if you were in hospital so I said to them you had no interest in contacting any one and after a while they admitted that they don’t contact anyone and you have to send your own proof in they want you to believe you don’t have a case when you probably do I’m at tribunal stage now my advice is don’t let rejection put you of tribunal is the only way you will get it
Replies
Sorry to hear what has happened. Please let us know if you need any help preparing for your tribunal!
Welcome to Scope's online community! It's great to have you here.
Best of luck with your tribunal - do let us know how it goes!
a
sofa
71% of PIP appeals are won but the figure for paper hearings falls to single figures. You improve your chances if you have a rep who can assess and/or make a case on your behalf but bear in mind that even when you elect for a paper hearing a tribunal have to decide if that’s appropriate and may adjourn anyway and ask you to attend.
I read on nearly every thread advice telling posters that they must get help from the likes of the CAB or Welfare Rights. that's good, but how do you think a poster would feel if they can't access that help? Deflated I would expect in that they might as well give up there and then as without that level of help they probably haven't got a chance in hell!
I point out that they are not alone, many, who have never filled in a PIP claim form before do actually try their best. They may make mistakes or even give the DWP good reason, but for the wrong reasons to keep on re-assessing them. They don't need to worry if they have no idea what they are doing or don't handle the face to face assessment in the right manner or fail to provide any evidence - they try.
Unfortunately the sad fact is that that sector of society will probably fail in their attempt in making a claim - but at least they have tried.
Don't make people worry if they have no one to assist them - they are not alone, they are the unlucky ones, and are with others in the same boat.
Some are so bad that I had to cover up their inadequacies at a Tribunal when the judge asked me who on earth had filled out the claim form.
Then I have stood in the pouring rain for an hour one morning outside the CAB office waiting to see someone only to be told that it was the first 6 that would be allowed in - come back and try again tomorrow I was told.
I did go back and was allowed in the following day. They took my name and the reason for my visit and was tole that someone would be in contact to get me to come back - I never heard anything more from them.
So yes try to get help but don't be down hearted if you fail to get it.
And as Mike Hughes and others say at regular intervals - getting good face to face advice is the best way to deal with problems.
FWIW the decline in face to face advice has seen an inevitable rise in web information to fill the void but infirmation is not advice. They are hugely different and, for example, I am aware professionally that many popular web sites offer poor information no matter who they’re recommended by.
daughter in her own home. I think the view is the reason so many appeals are won is because claimants produce much more medical reports at appeal stage than they produced at assessment stage which I have to admit was also the case for us
Keep fighting girls and guys x
Curiously when I received a copy of the report and challenged it's contents I was told that the notes had been destroyed.
An assessor will have their own opinions and, after all, you can't really be wrong about what your opinion is!
However If the assessor asks, "Can you walk from A to B" and the answer is "No I can't" then this should be recorded accurately. The assessor can say "He says he can't walk from A to b but I think that he can and he's lying/ mistaken" - that's fine - it's their opinion. What they can't do is change the answer to "Yes i can walk from A to B" because this is a lie. Dishonest. Fabrication.
When I asked to see the notes what I wanted to do was check their accuracy - not for opinion but matters of fact. I did this because the assessor's interview technique,using leading questions, failing to follow up my answers, and constantly summarising what I was saying incorrectly, etc left me with grave doubts as to her honesty.
The end result is as I have previously posted - numerous (probably more than 20 although I've not counted) lies. The fact that i wasn't allowed to look at them, and that they have now apparently been "destroyed" (I know for a fact that haven't) makes the whole process look increasingly dishonest.
Your opinions and advice are very valuable Mike. However your posts always seem to be doubting what i say and you don't seem to accept that, in my case, the assessment was carried out completely dishonestly.
Curiously I can't work out why....
1 - there are hundreds of threads on here saying the same as you. There is little doubt assessors do as you say and I’m struggling to think where I’ve challenged you on any aspect of that. The lack of a search function on this forum means that this and related issues come back again and again and the answers have to be repeated.
2 - much of what you say is based on both a misunderstanding of the role of the HCP and the software they’re using. Let’s take the example from your third paragraph. When the assessor is asking the question their role is not to write down your answer verbatim. If that was their role having a HCP assessment would be pointless because, unless your evidence was inconsistent, it would never do anything other than reproduce what you put in your claim pack.
They ask a question. You give an answer. They need to weigh that answer against what’s in your claim pack; their assessment on the day and any other evidence in their possession. Let’s put aside for a second that much of the latter clearly rarely happens.
If their view is that your answer isn’t suppprted by what they know or are seeing then they write down a different answer. Now, here’s the thing. The report is electronic. They have to select from specific options and they only get a small drop down to add notes. If your answer or their view doesn’t fit those drop downs they select the nearest. There are numerous ways in which this goes wrong and also doesn’t comply with PIP legislation but again let’s leave that to one side.
The bottom line is that the option of saying “they say this but I think that” isn’t actually always available in the form you describe or assume. So, often we conclude they’re hateful liars when in fact they’re trying to fit a square peg into a round hole using American designed software originally used for insurance and slanted towards saying “no”.
Great article on that re: ESA and the WCA at https://www.centreforwelfarereform.org/uploads/attachment/618/preventable-harm-and-the-work-capability-assessment.pdf.
3 - I don’t know what notes you think there were other than what they input on screen. I’ve yet to have a single client report that the HCP took notes separate to what they were inputting. I very much doubt they’d have the time for that but there are always new angles on this so I stand to be corrected. However, even if they did, those notes have no formal standing and should rightly be destroyed ASAP. There are some circumstances where notes do have legal standing, such as a tribunal judges handwritten record of proceedings, but this isn’t one of them.
4 - Bottom line always remains the same. When it comes to tribunals you’re usually kicking at an open door as regards HCP reports but to focus wholly on the report is the wrong approach. All a tribunal can do is give less weight to the report. They don’t really care whether there was 1 error or 20 or whether it was a mistake or dishonesty. You can still therefore lose your case if the weight of your evidence is not sufficient to outweigh the HCP report, discredited or otherwise.
about this and the lady on the phone actually said we are hearing a lot of this lately
Thanks for your latest post.I’ll comment and then keep quiet as this is a bit too ‘me-related’ and I’m not sure it will help anyone (which isn’t my intention - I did think I would help when I first posted) The ‘notes’ that I referred to were typed into a laptop (most of the time anyway)
Your post, and the link, are very informative and answer a lot of questions. My interview (and as I said I do know something about interviewing) was designed only to find reasons why I shouldn’t get benefit rather than find out facts and this is obviously explained by the fact that it is computer driven. I accept what you say about drop down menus/best choice answer etc but it must be incredibly poor software if it pushes the interviewer into asking a closed question - “Can you do x?” and then recording Yes instead of No, or vice versa.
I’m an honest person, and I don’t like people lying even if they are ‘only following orders’ (or a computer programme at least) The really crazy thing is that if the government want to save money then they don’t need to stitch people up - all that they need to do is change the criteria so that less people qualify.
I will be seeking your advice, and everyone else’s, when the DWP finally decide what to do about the assessment providers ‘clinical review’ which suggests I should get 44 points instead of 12.
Obviously on the second occasion “the computer said Yes!”
Thanks once again!
It was banned eventually.
ATOS then started using it over here on the new ESA programme.
So yes the whole software is biased in favour of the DWP.
I do actually feel sorry for some of the assessors in having to use such a heavily restrictive bit of software. They are actively discouraged in entering their own comments.
I have been reading all the posts above and parts are about the computer software which is used in an assessment. Well all I can say is that this wasn't relevant in my assessment and all the other people who had their assessments that day because all the computers were down and your form and evidence wasn't available. So I scored 0 for both. I was told it doesn't matter if the computers are down! so this has opened my eyes on computer software and my score.
I like it when people share their stories even if it is about themselves including yourself. This gives others on this forum support, life experiences and information they are looking for because some people can not access advice etc because they are housebound or can not face asking for help! Please do not keep quiet you are a valuable member of scope and I like to read others stories.
Hope you have a great christmas and a happy new year!
Just to answer your question scoring 0 is no not everybody get scores this my other PIP assessments I have been awarded enhanced rate for both. So it just shows that the HCP's do not always get it right and that there is inaccurate reports been written.
Merry xmas and a happy new year
nothing like if wad I actually tjought they had mixed my forms with someone else and scored 0 on everything just waiting for the review to come back Has been9 weeks
I had the same experience as you my F2F assessment report was totally different. Questions were answered but was never asked I had taken a family member with me to the assessment as I do not go out by myself because of my epilepsy and when they read the report they said that there must be a mistake. They said that they were sat in a different assessment as what it states in the report is not true, they thought that they must have had the names mixed up and made a mistake. I am now going to a tribunal. I hope you get good news.
Merry xmas and a happy new year
Personally I make an effort to try and see the whole picture. My 'beef' has always been with the assessment provider and, it now seems, their dodgy software. I have never had anything less than great service from DWP whenever I have contacted them - and I've told them so......
As poppy says - forums like this one gives a skewed view on it as most people on here, despite being in the minority of claimants, have had problems with their claim.
As an example I have had 3 face to face assessments for PIP in the past 5 years and all three came back with 0 points. But you must remember that people like me, you etc, are in the minority.
My report was written when the computers were down as I have a letter stating this. There are so many errors with the whole PIP process with myself from start to finish. The DWP even wrote to my MP and said that I had been awarded enhanced for care which was untrue. Theres many more errors so I think that I have been treat unfairly. Lets see what happens when I go to a tribunal, I have had people look at my case and have been told its very strong and I should win it, however I have lost faith in the whole system as the errors made in mine are unbelievable I have written proof. I have worked previously in a professional job in education until my health prevented me and all I can say is if I had made all these errors, I would have been sacked!
Merry christmas and a happy new year!
I have been retired now for 10 years and worked both for the government as well as in private practice.
If the standard of reporting in my day had been as shambolic as it is now, many heads would have rolled - either by way of a transfer out of the department, demotion or if that poor of standard was the norm then they would have been sacked as incapable of carrying out their duties.
Unfortunately we live in a different world now where accuracy and taking responsibility for one's own actions has almost disappeared.
If I had taken a written statement from an individual and it was full of these ridiculous errors that are happening now, I would have had the High Court demanding explanations.
Even the Tribunals today seem to accept that the assessor reports are to be taken with a pinch of salt. Yet no one is being held to account. Result: carry on regardless as no one is really that bothered as to who says what and why.