example from a Statement of Reasons

djbantiques

ilovecats said:

twonker said:

ilovecats said:

twonker said:

CockneyRebel said:

If an assessment is not fit for purpose, then how can a claimant be assessed at the correct rate without a further assessment ? No, it should not happen. Assessors are human and mistakes will be made but if there is insufficient information on the report then I see no other option. Better the stress of another assessment than a failure

Does there really have to be another face to face assessment?
Given that none of this is the fault of the claimant could not the assessing company and the DWP work together to see what information was gathered at the assessment that is not in dispute, consider what other evidence may be available, claim form, written evidence, and maybe they could contact the respective medical/social contact that the claimant agreed to the claim form? What about a paper based report?
Having done all of that then yes the ultimate scenario is that another assessment is carried out.

I do suspect however that the assessor and the DWP don't want to put that amount of extra work in as it is much easier to put the responsibility onto the claimant to have to go through another assessment.

It is not the fault of the claimant, you are right. 

A paper based report can only be completed if a enough evidence has been sent to the DWP in the first place. Every claim is reviewed to see if could potentially be a paper based review however not many can be because the information given is normally poor or very contradictory. Hence the need for a face to face. 

Even if a PBR is attempted, normally due to the DWP time restrictions, if the GP or any medical contact that the claimant has put down, has not agreed to provide information within (3 days i think) then it will go to F2F.

A second face to face will only occur if not enough information was gathered the first time around. If the initial assessment was poor, it is better to get the person in again and a better quality of information gathered. 

Sorry and no disrespect intended but no time limit of that nature should be enforced. As I have said it is up to both the DWP and the assessor to do everything within their power with no stone left unturned and without unreasonable time limit, to rectify the 'error'.  I am sure that the claimant would want that to happen and would not be bothered if it took another 3/4 weeks to sort out. Better that than face another gruelling face to face assessment.

Unfortunately as much as people would like PBR’s, even if more time was allowed, most claimants do not send enough information in. Also, most GP’s even when they do return the requested information, will normally just list the conditions and current meds and leave the functional history section blank, OR will just not fill it out at all and send it back blank!

So the failures for claimants to not get the reward they deserve is down to themselves and their GPs not providing enough information.

justg72

Hi Mikeymoo 
Hi to all who are waiting for a tribunals you may find this helpful.

I have come across a fantastic site in regards to P.I.P. thanks to a former tribunal judge called Sir Henry Brooke.

 The website is www.pipinfo.net

If you go onto the website you will  have different boxes you can click on. You can also look at a variety of tribunal cases and examples of statement of reasons, of different disabilities and conditions in relation to P.I.P. tribunals. It also tells you to, I have copied and pasted this: choose from the options above for details of regulations and case law relating to personal independence payment. You can search by activity, issue or health condition to find out more about the legal framework and how the Upper Tribunal has interpreted the law.

We hope that pipinfo will help advisers in assisting people to make a new claim for personal independence payment, and in challenging decisions to refuse, or award a lower rate of, the benefit.
Hope this helps all who are going to a tribunal for P.I.P. I found this invaluable.
Good luck 

twonker

Some are, some aren't. It's a lottery.
It doesn't really matter how well you fill the form in or what the quality of the evidence is. If the assessor makes a c**** up then that's the problem.
As for expecting the assessor to start at a midway point or just cover the offending section, do you really expect that to happen? I don't. It would be human nature in that if they are being paid to carry out an assessment that is what they would do, start from scratch.
My worry would be that the first assessment went well with an assessor that listened but still got it wrong. Heaven help if you had one of those for the second assessment that wanted to run the assessment their way, not giving you the time to answer fully before they have moved on to the next question.
 

Fitznspatz

@justg72, what a fantastic resource. Hats off to you for bringing it to people’s attention.

justg72

Fitznspatz said:

@justg72, what a fantastic resource. Hats off to you for bringing it to people’s attention.

Hi Fitzspatz
Have you had a look at it?
I wish I could help more as this resource is the one of the best i have seen. Would scope advertise this on their site as I think more people need to know about this. Also the judge I have mentioned above is appalled by how the DWP and assessors treat vulnerable  disabled people and he agrees that the PIP is not fit for purpose. He is fed up with all the injustice that it causes people. He is always getting involved with Parliament and the MP'S and fights for the disabled after spending many years as a tribunal judge. Thanks to him I come across the website. I think all who are fighting the system especially P.I.P. this is the best website I have come across as it shows you genuine cases of peoples tribunals and the statement of reasons and the case law.
Good Luck to all who are waiting on their tribunals.

Fitznspatz

Yes, I looked at the site and was very impressed. It was written with clarity and precision, completely devoid of legalese. 

Very fortunately my my wife was successful with her PIP claim and did not have to recourse to a Mandatory Reconsideration or a Tribunal but, had she needed to, the judge’s guidance would have been invaluable.

I am a new user on this forum and do not fully understand its finer points but I hope one of the moderators can somehow highlight the link and give it prominence.

twonker

ilovecats said:

twonker said:

Some are, some aren't. It's a lottery.
It doesn't really matter how well you fill the form in or what the quality of the evidence is. If the assessor makes a c**** up then that's the problem.
As for expecting the assessor to start at a midway point or just cover the offending section, do you really expect that to happen? I don't. It would be human nature in that if they are being paid to carry out an assessment that is what they would do, start from scratch.
My worry would be that the first assessment went well with an assessor that listened but still got it wrong. Heaven help if you had one of those for the second assessment that wanted to run the assessment their way, not giving you the time to answer fully before they have moved on to the next question.
 

If the first assessor gathered enough info but just applied it wrong, it would most likely be picked up as an ‘incorrect descriptor’ and a new one would be a applied by the reviewing assessor without the need for a reassessment 

 

But others have had to go through a full re-assessment. At least two other posters on here have recently had this happen to them.