Pip f2f

baggsy26

had my F2f this morning that lasted only 25minutes good or bad the aasesser said she wouldn’t be doing the leg and back test that she previously spoke about has there was no need for her to do them 

wilko

@baggsy26, hello, the fact that you had a shorter assessment than what you expected and the HCP didn’t do the leg and back tests may be a good thing for you, maybe your evidence and health conditions, diagnosis was enough for the HCP to decide that the tests where not required to make her award recommendation. I would wait till the end of next week then phone the DWP and request a copy of your assessment report and on receiving it about a week. Once requested you should be able to work out what your award may should be but you still have to wait for the award notification letter. Keep the community updated and keep posting.

poppy123456

Hi,

Short assessments really don't mean anything other than it was short and it's impossible to predict anything at this point.

Request the assessment report will give you some idea. Good luck.

Adrian_Scope

Hi @baggsy26, I hope it wasn't too stressful an experience? As Wilko and Poppy say, give it a week and phone them asking for a copy of the report. 
Best of luck and let us know how you get on.

struggle2222

I wouldn’t count on anything until you get the report. The HCP’S are not to be trusted. They give you a false sense of caring and then screw things up for you!! Sorry to sound morbid but I speak from personal experience!!!!

poppy123456

struggle2222 said:

I wouldn’t count on anything until you get the report. The HCP’S are not to be trusted. They give you a false sense of caring and then screw things up for you!! Sorry to sound morbid but I speak from personal experience!!!!

This isn't always true. There are some nice honest HCPs out there but we never hear the good stories. Myself and my daughter have never received a bad report and we've both had 2 PIP assessments.

patriciahendy

Hopefully, a change of government will put a halt to this flawed, degrading and humiliating system. Non qualified "assessors" who have to Google certain conditions  because they have no knowledge of them  is an absolute disgrace. The government should be ashamed. With so many thousands of complaints this system should have been scrapped long ago. The physical examination report on our friend Jan's  "assessment" form was totally inaccurate. Her condition requires a thorough and specific examination by specialist medical personnel - not some twenty something keyboard  queen who has been nowhere near a medical school!  However, Jan was successful with her MR  ( a twelve page letter ! ) and her mobility and daily living components have been re-instated after many months of anxiety and  stress. She will be seventy four when her next  review  becomes due. Let's hope that repeat "assessments" for pensioners with disabilities will end and for everyone.

struggle2222

patriciahendy said:

Hopefully, a change of government will put a halt to this flawed, degrading and humiliating system. Non qualified "assessors" who have to Google certain conditions  because they have no knowledge of them  is an absolute disgrace. The government should be ashamed. With so many thousands of complaints this system should have been scrapped long ago. The physical examination report on our friend Jan's  "assessment" form was totally inaccurate. Her condition requires a thorough and specific examination by specialist medical personnel - not some twenty something keyboard  queen who has been nowhere near a medical school!  However, Jan was successful with her MR  ( a twelve page letter ! ) and her mobility and daily living components have been re-instated after many months of anxiety and  stress. She will be seventy four when her next  review  becomes due. Let's hope that repeat "assessments" for pensioners with disabilities will end and for everyone.

I totally agree. It’s a ridiculously laughable situation. Why does the government not set up their own assessment department, an arm of the NHS.? At least there would be accountability and oversight.

struggle2222

Not to mention, the Said dept would have direct access to medical records and as a result would cut out all the  bureaucracy and middle men. Surely it would be far easier and cost effective and time saving!!! 

poppy123456

struggle2222 said:

Not to mention, the Said dept would have direct access to medical records and as a result would cut out all the  bureaucracy and middle men. Surely it would be far easier and cost effective and time saving!!! 

This isn't correct. They don't have direct access to anyone's medical records because of the new data protection laws. They can't access anyone's medical records with the claimant permission. I'm sure there would be claimants that would completely object to this, if they did.

It wouldn't be time saving either because requesting evidence takes time, backlogs are already long in most areas and this would only add to the backlogs.

It's the claimant responsibility to prove they qualify not the DWP or health assessment providers. The HCP doesn't need to have knowledge in any condition because all conditions affect people differently.

struggle2222

poppy123456 said:

struggle2222 said:

Not to mention, the Said dept would have direct access to medical records and as a result would cut out all the  bureaucracy and middle men. Surely it would be far easier and cost effective and time saving!!! 

This isn't correct. They don't have direct access to anyone's medical records because of the new data protection laws. They can't access anyone's medical records with the claimant permission. I'm sure there would be claimants that would completely object to this, if they did.

It wouldn't be time saving either because requesting evidence takes time, backlogs are already long in most areas and this would only add to the backlogs.

It's the claimant responsibility to prove they qualify not the DWP or health assessment providers. The HCP doesn't need to have knowledge in any condition because all conditions affect people differently.

You didn’t read my previous comment 

struggle2222

poppy123456 said:

struggle2222 said:

Not to mention, the Said dept would have direct access to medical records and as a result would cut out all the  bureaucracy and middle men. Surely it would be far easier and cost effective and time saving!!! 

This isn't correct. They don't have direct access to anyone's medical records because of the new data protection laws. They can't access anyone's medical records with the claimant permission. I'm sure there would be claimants that would completely object to this, if they did.

It wouldn't be time saving either because requesting evidence takes time, backlogs are already long in most areas and this would only add to the backlogs.

It's the claimant responsibility to prove they qualify not the DWP or health assessment providers. The HCP doesn't need to have knowledge in any condition because all conditions affect people differently.

I totally agree. It’s a ridiculously laughable situation. Why does the government not set up their own assessment department, an arm of the NHS.? At least there would be accountability and oversight.

cristobal

I think it's important to try and be objective about this, even though that is sometimes difficult if you've had a bad experience.

My assessment, and assessor, were both poor - and I've had my say about that - but that doesn't mean that all other assessors are the same. 

An overwhelming majority of PIP claims are dealt with correctly but we don't tend to hear about them. Human nature seems to say that we are all more likely to have a moan than say how good things are. I like a moan as well but it's important to try and be balanced about it....

I don't believe that access to medical records is an issue, and I personally don't want the DWP looking through mine. If you're claiming PIP - as I am - all that is needed is a few pages to support the fact that you have been diagnosed with a particular condition. The rest of the evidence is about how your condition affects your functionality, and it's not likely to be found in your medical records because it's not something doctors deal with. Some people don't seem to understand this which is why a lot of posts start with a long list of medical conditions but never mention the impact they have on day to day living. 

As @poppy123456 says it's for the claimant to supply evidence to support their claim.

baggsy26

Thanks guys I will wait for report and keep you all updated she just said there was no need for her to carry out the examination so I was thinking is this a bad thing so will wait and see

poppy123456

Not needing the examination doesn't mean it's a bad thing. The report will give you some idea.

twonker

Username_removed said:

@struggle2222 Between 1970 and 2013 the government had their own assessors via the NHS. It was no cheaper because NHS staff need an incentive to do non-NHS work and that costs. Oversight of NHS staff came from their professional bodies and as now they were largely disinterested in reducing their numbers through successful complaints. 

43 years was probably long enough to amass evidence of whether it worked. It absolutely did not. The fundamental issue remains the fact that any report written by NHS or private assessment providers has been commissioned by DWP so culturally decision makers are conditioned to accept those no matter how contradictory or obviously wrong the content. You have a circle that cannot be squared. If you commission reports and a significant proportion of them say you’re wrong because a claimant isn’t fit for work or is functionally disabled then why would you continue to commission them? The only way to make it make sense is to have DMs accept what HCPs in the face of all common sense or logical argument. 

The decision makers have no knowledge of medical or disability issues. They need to 'commission' a report that looks at the impact only of disability.
If the current HCP's are no good then who should carry out these specialised assessments - a GP or consultant can't they aren't interested in the impact only the diagnosing and treatment  of the condition. 

struggle2222

ilovecats said:

Once given the same training, and if adhering to the same DWP standards, any medical profession should reach the same conclusions. It’s not about how much they know are whatever condition, it’s about applying the training to assess functional restriction. Medical knowledge is a nice to know, which is why paramedics, nurses etc are trained. Anyone with a logical brain could be trained to assess but they would find it hard without a medical background.

I’m not going to argue with you about it. In my opinion their a bunch of liars 

twonker

ilovecats said:

Once given the same training, and if adhering to the same DWP standards, any medical profession should reach the same conclusions. It’s not about how much they know are whatever condition, it’s about applying the training to assess functional restriction. Medical knowledge is a nice to know, which is why paramedics, nurses etc are trained. Anyone with a logical brain could be trained to assess but they would find it hard without a medical background.

So what you are saying is that the training itself is the reason why there are so many inconsistencies in the reports?
If as you say all would come to the same conclusion after training then it is the way you are trained that is wrong.
My reports and many others reported on this site tell complete lies. When accompanied into the assessment why would a report say I went in alone when in fact my wife was with me all through the assessment?. Why would a report state that I walk a dog when I don't? Why would a report say that I drive a car when I don't own one and have no driving licence? I could go on and on. I don't want to get involved in opinion I am only looking at facts. 
In fact in the two assessments I have had it is the justification for refusing points that annoys me. When lies like these are used as the justification then there is something seriously wrong.
For an example all manner of conclusions were drawn from the driving a car. All manner of conclusions were drawn from walking great distances regularly with this dog as well as feeding and looking after it.

The problem becomes trying to disprove what the assessor has reported. You just cannot prove that I can't and don't drive, I cannot prove that the dog does not exist.

twonker

ilovecats said:

The purpose of the training is that technically, anyone can be assessed by any HP, and the report outcome should always be the same. Human nature dictates that is not possible, but it is the overall aim. 

Are you now seriously suggesting that human nature dictates the outcome of an assessment and not facts?
Presumably personal opinion is an option to consider?
If there is any form of conflict or general ill feeling that also comes into play?
I go into the assessment on the basis that the assessor is not my friend and never will be, that they represent the DWP for which I hold no trust for and maybe the assessor or myself have a issue with each other, maybe how I speak, maybe my personality appears to belittle the assessor.
 And all of that would over ride a report based only and entirely on facts?

Thank goodness that I was trained to a better standard in my career with the Civil Service.
If human nature was to be allowed to interfere with justice many innocent people would have been prosecuted simply because I didn't like them or they tried to belittle me. 

cristobal

@yadnad - 

When you say "If human nature was to be allowed to interfere with justice many innocent people would have been prosecuted" this tends to support what @ilovecats is saying I think.

 Innocent people do get prosecuted because a police officer is having a bad day, people get poor service in the bank, or searched by customs for the same reason - because they're humans not robots.

No-one is saying it's right, or even that it's done intentionally ..but it does happen....

April2018mom

Innocent people do get bullied by other people. Just the other morning I was at work and I was harassed by a well meaning frequent customer when I was operating a till. It was not her fault she was in a hurry that morning but she stressed me out so I made a few errors when giving her some coins. At the end of the day we all are doing the best we can possibly do. This is my mantra for bad times.