If this is your first visit, check out the community guide. You will have to Join us or Sign in before you can post.
Receiving too many notifications? Adjust your notification settings.
PIP MR PA6 report
braca
Member - under moderation Posts: 85 Pioneering
If MR is sent back to IAS/Capita by DWP would it be HP supervisor who looks over the PA4 and further evidence ? going by my PA6 report it would seem HP has taken time to read over points highlighted in my evidence and awarded points...same evidence was available at FTF review and HP maybe did not have the time to go over this ?
Replies
Advice and justification by HP who did MR to DWP case manager was to make award . My own opinion are that HP are put under time constraints by their own management teams to ensure they are getting daily workload done, Last year I went through traumatic experience with major operation and two close family bereavements and diagnosed with skin cancer that had effect on my mood and anxiety and along with back pain, daily bladder incontinence and fatigue, all of this was evidenced in consultant letters sent to DWP before my F2F review. HP said I presented well at MSE and was accompanied by my wife and yes I agree as try to put on a brave face, If only HP could have looked at my evidence properly all this MR nonsense could have been avoided and not forgetting 12 week wait for decision.
( change of advice ) - PA6
Excerpt
The functional history indicates this gentleman has difficulty managing stairs but can manage short journeys reliably. Whilst the MSO was unremarkable it is clear from the evidence from the pain clinic and his pain medication that this gentleman's main restriction to his function is his pain. This is consistent with his medical history. Therefore it is medically reasonable to state this gentleman would require aids to minimise bending and to reduce pain and enable him to manage his toileting needs and to dress lower body reliably most days and would be limited to mobilising up to 20 metres in order to manage this distance reliably most days.
At F2F review HP justification choice moving around. MSE shows he did not look tired. IO noted he walked with normal pace and gait. Although he reports that pain impacts on his mobility this is back and abdominal pain. Whilst he has been referred to the pain clinic ( had already attended pain clinic and sent report with other evidence ) He is not prescribed significantly high levels of pain medication.
Pain medication prescribed by consultant doctors 700 mg medicated plaster ( morphine based prolonged release pain relief used in the management of chronic severe pain ) Tens machine used for back pain relief, Codeine phosphate 30mg, Paracetamol, Mindfulness techniques recommended by Pain psychology and ongoing treatment.
Two different HPs one did not appear to have read evidence and applied own opinion/assumptions to report for DWP
The other HP at MR stage almost certainly read evidence and applied it correctly in report to DWP.
What is solution to all this ?????
How many times are you asked how are you only to reply I'm OK how are you?
I’m suffering excruciating chronic pain including nerve pain and phantom pain, I can hardly walk a few paces without having to stop as I cannot put weight through my left side any longer,
I believe that’s enough to say I can’t walk 20mtrs,
But if I’m taking a high dose of pain killers and they help with the pain, does that mean I can automatically walk 200mtrs ? To an assessor I mean.
what on earth is “walking reliably “ and how in gods name could anyone possibly prove They couldn’t ?
BTW I stopped taking huge doses of tramadol and amatryptaline 10 yrs ago as they were ineffective, they did however completely zombiefy me,
When the assessor decides which descriptor applies to you, they must consider whether you can carry out the activity reliably.
This means:
somehow I lost my balance and fell backwards,
My leg and false leg couldn’t keep up and my carer couldn’t catch me, ( I’m 16st and she’s not )
I fell against a kerb and broke a rib and a vertebra in my back.
Is that under the “ safely “ part ? I think probably not,
How could I possibly prove that fall was due to pain ?
Yes I could prove I broke bones but not how or why.
therefore this will most likely be ignored until tribunal.
If I fell once every 5yrs or 5 times a day it makes no difference!
Nobody would just take my word and proof is not available.
However if medication removes that pain to a larger degree than obviously your walking will improve.
Which way would you rather have it? Be in permanent agony and unable to walk or take the medication, have a better lifestyle but obviously would not get the points?
Surely the latter is far more important when compared to say £58 a week?
I didn’t think a little light hearted humour would hurt,
I’m soooo sorry, I feel terrible,
As an example:- if you fall regularly and are generally uninjured then that might be an acceptable risk as the consequences are minor (unless you are very unlucky)
If you have memory problems and, even once a month, you let a pan boil dry this would most likely not be not be 'acceptable' as even though it doesn't happen very often the potential consequences are disastrous...
Hope this makes sense...
@braca I'm wondering why you are referring to a PA6 for your MR and not a PA5. Did you have 2 MR's? Before anyone says that's not possible you'd be wrong because I managed to get another review after my MR.
I completely get what you are saying about the system not being fit for purpose. Most people would say you got the result in the end so what is the problem. However it highlights even more the injustice of the first decision.
the 'evidence' I used was a report from my consultant who, rather helpfully, said that I was 'already showing signs of decline in cognitive function' (or something similar. Memory/ cognitive loss is acknowledged as part of my condition.) I also attached a diary with notes of incidents such as leaving the oven on, letting pans boil dry etc, dropping pans etc
I acknowledge that many people will say that I could have just made it up but, the way I see it, that could apply to everything that I wrote on the form. I took a decision to stop cooking before I caused a serious incident - even if an assessor doesn't believe me at the positive thing is that I'm safe now that my wife is cooking. Well, fairly safe anyway!!
I have had memory tests - remembering an address, 100 - 7 - 7 etc but as far as I can work out you have to be really bad before you are referred anywhere.
If I have the choice of being in agony and not be able to walk very far, BUT still be able to watch the telly or talk or something.
OR being drugged up to the eyeballs to the extent of not even being remotely coherent to others and most of the time asleep,
I absolutely know which one I’d choose....AND I CHOSE PAIN !,
That’s which way I’d “rather have it” !
Is that your expert medical opinion is it ? That I’d have a better life taking medication.
As I said after 10 yrs of medication I gave up as they were ineffective,
you may have read that in my post !
So being incoherent and still in pain was NOT an option,
Another point being; 10yrs of high doses of any medication doesn’t do the liver any good, as I found out to cirrhosis .
Doctors will tell you that if you ask !
as for the money ?? “ say £58 a week “ , who said I want £58 a week ?
you have no idea whether I need £2 or £2000 that doesn’t come into it,
I find your comments offensive and sanctimonious at best,, your implying I’m only in this for the money,
I cant work and I don’t drive but I need money to get to hospital appointments,
I shouldn’t have to justify to you if or why I need PIP !
Scenario:
If I DON’T take medication because I don’t want them,I get marked down as I’m not on medication,
If I take medication I get marked down as I’m on medication,
Can you not see what I’m saying ?
Why should anyone have to shovel drugs down their throat to get the help they need ?
or not apparently!
makes very good sense.
Even to the point some claimants I have heard of actually continually get their monthly prescription supplied but never take the drugs - but it does provide for evidence that the drugs are prescribed which helps with a PIP claim.
I mentioned this in another post on here that an individual I know has prescribed some heavy top line pain relief (initially prescribed by the pain clinic consultant). It was described by one poster that one of these drugs was normally only prescribed for end of life. The individual concerned never takes the stuff but has built up good evidence via his repeat prescription list that he needs it. The result of his PIP claim was Enhanced for both Care & Mobility for an ongoing period.
It was a few months ago but i can't find it..
There is no argument that he does obtain this medication every month, it's whether he would want to admit what he does with it.
Unless of course your still implying that I’m trying to scam the dwp like that “someone you know”.
I just told you I took medication for 10yrs and I stopped taking them as they were ineffective, that by no means tells YOU they are still prescribed!
what I didn’t say was that myself and my consultants made that decision nearly 12yrs ago, I just didn’t think I be having to elaborate or justify that to you.
Also if you have not informed the dwp of the knowledge you have about this so called
“individual you know” then shame on you, and stop advising honest people about what they should and shouldn’t do,
Absolutely disgraceful behaviour to say nothing about what you know and there’s no excuse for saying “I don’t want to get involved “!
GET INVOLVED !
Its no wonder the system is so clogged up when people like you shy away from reporting fraudulent claimants.