when is somebody in power going to listen?

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

dolfrog

mrbuttons said:

Roddy said:

pollyanna1052 said:

Roddy said:

DWP = Decisions Without Proficiency
PIP = Professional Incompetence. Period.
ESA = Exist Suffering Alone
UC = Unethical Conduct

What beneficial  Benefit  will they introduce next? 
DII? Disability Is Idleness? 
YPIO Your Putting It On?


The world is their oyster... Perhaps they should have a referendum eh? You know, put it to the proper people: The able-bodied 'we're-all-right-mob' and those that don't know 'jack' about what it's like to be treated with total disregard or respect, of do they think that all disability is a matter of personal choice? There is more intelligence in one of my walking sticks than the entire workforce at the Department of Works and Pensions.  

Roddy said:

DWP = Decisions Without Proficiency
PIP = Professional Incompetence. Period.
ESA = Exist Suffering Alone
UC = Unethical Conduct

What beneficial  Benefit  will they introduce next? 
DII? Disability Is Idleness? 
YPIO Your Putting It On?


The world is their oyster... Perhaps they should have a referendum eh? You know, put it to the proper people: The able-bodied 'we're-all-right-mob' and those that don't know 'jack' about what it's like to be treated with total disregard or respect, of do they think that all disability is a matter of personal choice? There is more intelligence in one of my walking sticks than the entire workforce at the Department of Works and Pensions.  

Different subject, but with very similar overtones.
I have no hearing in my right ear. Some years ago, I joined a free Adult Ed programme for lip reading. The next set of lessons became payable for. When questioned why this had changed. The answer was that lip reading had been put under the category of `pastimes and hobbies`. Oh yeh, like we CHOSE to be deaf, like we choose to make a raffia basket! I left the class.

If they can squeeze another £1 from you, then they will. It's atrocious. It's like giving a child an ice cream and then taking it back. Don't get me wrong, I'm eternally grateful that my medications are all delivered, my recycled trash is collected etc. etc. but it costs me a fortune and for what? A shoddy and a sometimes forgetful service run by Aliens and the incompetent. If WE managed other peoples lives in this way, we'd all end up in Bedlam. It doesn't matter in which direction you turn to for a professional service these days from ANY government run department, it all goes pear-shaped. What's wrong with these people?     

i'm sure there is corruption at the heart of this.

many government insiders have financial interests in these companies. there is a moral and financial conflict of interests and financial greed is driving how the assessments are conducted. 

The corrupt have been the main party of government for the last 9 years, how many millionaires are in the Cabinet, now and the last 9 years. ir is all about them making money at the expense of others especially those least able to self advocate. 

Roddy

dolfrog said:

mrbuttons said:

Roddy said:

pollyanna1052 said:

Roddy said:

DWP = Decisions Without Proficiency
PIP = Professional Incompetence. Period.
ESA = Exist Suffering Alone
UC = Unethical Conduct

What beneficial  Benefit  will they introduce next? 
DII? Disability Is Idleness? 
YPIO Your Putting It On?


The world is their oyster... Perhaps they should have a referendum eh? You know, put it to the proper people: The able-bodied 'we're-all-right-mob' and those that don't know 'jack' about what it's like to be treated with total disregard or respect, of do they think that all disability is a matter of personal choice? There is more intelligence in one of my walking sticks than the entire workforce at the Department of Works and Pensions.  

Roddy said:

DWP = Decisions Without Proficiency
PIP = Professional Incompetence. Period.
ESA = Exist Suffering Alone
UC = Unethical Conduct

What beneficial  Benefit  will they introduce next? 
DII? Disability Is Idleness? 
YPIO Your Putting It On?


The world is their oyster... Perhaps they should have a referendum eh? You know, put it to the proper people: The able-bodied 'we're-all-right-mob' and those that don't know 'jack' about what it's like to be treated with total disregard or respect, of do they think that all disability is a matter of personal choice? There is more intelligence in one of my walking sticks than the entire workforce at the Department of Works and Pensions.  

Different subject, but with very similar overtones.
I have no hearing in my right ear. Some years ago, I joined a free Adult Ed programme for lip reading. The next set of lessons became payable for. When questioned why this had changed. The answer was that lip reading had been put under the category of `pastimes and hobbies`. Oh yeh, like we CHOSE to be deaf, like we choose to make a raffia basket! I left the class.

If they can squeeze another £1 from you, then they will. It's atrocious. It's like giving a child an ice cream and then taking it back. Don't get me wrong, I'm eternally grateful that my medications are all delivered, my recycled trash is collected etc. etc. but it costs me a fortune and for what? A shoddy and a sometimes forgetful service run by Aliens and the incompetent. If WE managed other peoples lives in this way, we'd all end up in Bedlam. It doesn't matter in which direction you turn to for a professional service these days from ANY government run department, it all goes pear-shaped. What's wrong with these people?     

i'm sure there is corruption at the heart of this.

many government insiders have financial interests in these companies. there is a moral and financial conflict of interests and financial greed is driving how the assessments are conducted. 

The corrupt have been the main party of government for the last 9 years, how many millionaires are in the Cabinet, now and the last 9 years. ir is all about them making money at the expense of others especially those least able to self advocate. 

Many MPs are purchasing large areas of Farmland. What does that tell you about the likelihood of building projects in the pipeline? 

worried33

pollyanna1052 said:

@worried 33....you say you dont feel PIP is unfit for purpose....a spokesperson from Scope said it was and so many here can vouch for that with their results/assessments.....I went through the ESA system when I was of working age and dont remember it giving me quite as much anxiety...I do recall the form taking 3 hours to fill in, compared to 2 hours with PIP....I`m 67 now and had to retire on ill health grounds at 47!!! So I`ve had 20 glorious years at this game!

For me the PIP process was an ordeal with the waiting (ESA seems to have much quicker DM waiting times), but looking at the descriptors and the award lengths the basic principle of PIP in my opinion is fairer.

My PIP was a 5 year award, by the time I have my review it wouldnt surprise me if I have had 5 WCA's in that time, as on average I have a WCA annually.  5 WCA's is going to cause me a lot more distress than 1 PIP assessment.  I am also reasonably confident I will always meet the PIP descriptors I have, whilst with ESA I am relying on regulation 35, as the descriptors are really difficult to hit.  PIP doesnt have silly stuff like pretending someone can use a wheelchair they dont have.

To me the problems with PIP are that assessors are not applying descriptors correctly due to things like assuming someone isnt in pain because they dont have ultra powerful painkillers, the waiting times, and perhaps misleading expectations from claimants.  This last point is perhaps controversial.

As I see posts on here and other sites, people post they are ill, a relative is ill, they have X and Y condition, but they then have absolutely no idea what descriptors they hit (I am sure poppy can understand what I am saying here), they say because they are "ill" and that must mean they should qualify for PIP.  They then dont get the points and get angry.  Now I would absolutely love if the mobile descriptors were made to be looser, but they not, I dont get any mobility component but that doesnt mean I think PIP is entirely unfit for purpose.  Looking at the PIP descriptors vs DLA I honestly think its a better benefit.  I definitely think its better than ESA, if ESA didnt have regulations 26,35 as overrides there would be chaos as the majority on it would be found fit for work.

I do agree there is lots of ways to improve PIP, but do I think it should be entirely scrapped and something brand new drawn up? no.  I do have that opinion of ESA tho.    Maybe you are one of the lucky one's on ESA who keep getting deferred and that can mislead people, as that is not the norm and that makes me dislike ESA as well in that there is inconsistent treatment of people, some get deferred without any medical input on the decision purely based on local decision making, and that is unfair to those who dont get deferred.

I agree the ESA form is easier, but that form doesnt help the claimant, as the form appears to be designed to get minimal information which makes a FFW decision easier to make.  The PIP form is more in line with the descriptors.

I would love a link to the scope spokesperson tho as there must be a good reason for them saying what they did, but just remember my opinion is just my opinion.

If I was in power I would do the following.

1 - Impose a target for decision making times.  Employ new staff to make sure these targets can be met.
2 - Remove the ability for auditors to change descriptors.
3 - Make AP's and their HCP's accountable.
4 - Employ a system where there is specially trained staff available to deal with things like PIP application forms, so claimants know what descriptors they hit, and if they dont hit any or not enough make sure this is explained to them.  (CAB definitely doesnt cut it, relying on charities is a bad idea)
5 - Review the descriptors to see what groups of people are not meeting the current descriptors but do have additional living costs related to their functional disabilities, and if required add new descriptors to catch these people in the net.
6 - Scrap mandatory reconsideration's.
7 - Modernise the process so much more of it can be handled online, including submitting documents online.

pollyanna1052

worried33 said:

pollyanna1052 said:

@worried 33....you say you dont feel PIP is unfit for purpose....a spokesperson from Scope said it was and so many here can vouch for that with their results/assessments.....I went through the ESA system when I was of working age and dont remember it giving me quite as much anxiety...I do recall the form taking 3 hours to fill in, compared to 2 hours with PIP....I`m 67 now and had to retire on ill health grounds at 47!!! So I`ve had 20 glorious years at this game!

For me the PIP process was an ordeal with the waiting (ESA seems to have much quicker DM waiting times), but looking at the descriptors and the award lengths the basic principle of PIP in my opinion is fairer.

My PIP was a 5 year award, by the time I have my review it wouldnt surprise me if I have had 5 WCA's in that time, as on average I have a WCA annually.  5 WCA's is going to cause me a lot more distress than 1 PIP assessment.  I am also reasonably confident I will always meet the PIP descriptors I have, whilst with ESA I am relying on regulation 35, as the descriptors are really difficult to hit.  PIP doesnt have silly stuff like pretending someone can use a wheelchair they dont have.

To me the problems with PIP are that assessors are not applying descriptors correctly due to things like assuming someone isnt in pain because they dont have ultra powerful painkillers, the waiting times, and perhaps misleading expectations from claimants.  This last point is perhaps controversial.

As I see posts on here and other sites, people post they are ill, a relative is ill, they have X and Y condition, but they then have absolutely no idea what descriptors they hit (I am sure poppy can understand what I am saying here), they say because they are "ill" and that must mean they should qualify for PIP.  They then dont get the points and get angry.  Now I would absolutely love if the mobile descriptors were made to be looser, but they not, I dont get any mobility component but that doesnt mean I think PIP is entirely unfit for purpose.  Looking at the PIP descriptors vs DLA I honestly think its a better benefit.  I definitely think its better than ESA, if ESA didnt have regulations 26,35 as overrides there would be chaos as the majority on it would be found fit for work.

I do agree there is lots of ways to improve PIP, but do I think it should be entirely scrapped and something brand new drawn up? no.  I do have that opinion of ESA tho.    Maybe you are one of the lucky one's on ESA who keep getting deferred and that can mislead people, as that is not the norm and that makes me dislike ESA as well in that there is inconsistent treatment of people, some get deferred without any medical input on the decision purely based on local decision making, and that is unfair to those who dont get deferred.

I agree the ESA form is easier, but that form doesnt help the claimant, as the form appears to be designed to get minimal information which makes a FFW decision easier to make.  The PIP form is more in line with the descriptors.

I would love a link to the scope spokesperson tho as there must be a good reason for them saying what they did, but just remember my opinion is just my opinion.

If I was in power I would do the following.

1 - Impose a target for decision making times.  Employ new staff to make sure these targets can be met.
2 - Remove the ability for auditors to change descriptors.
3 - Make AP's and their HCP's accountable.
4 - Employ a system where there is specially trained staff available to deal with things like PIP application forms, so claimants know what descriptors they hit, and if they dont hit any or not enough make sure this is explained to them.  (CAB definitely doesnt cut it, relying on charities is a bad idea)
5 - Review the descriptors to see what groups of people are not meeting the current descriptors but do have additional living costs related to their functional disabilities, and if required add new descriptors to catch these people in the net.
6 - Scrap mandatory reconsideration's.
7 - Modernise the process so much more of it can be handled online, including submitting documents online.

As I see it, the ONLY thing wrong with PIP is that some assessors don't put the correct answers down when speaking to claimants. All the MRs and Tribunals are brought about because inaccuracies are put onto forms by assessors. There are plentiful examples of this when claimants see how their answers differ to their scores.

paffuto10

Where have all the replies gone? 
If you look under "recent discussions" it says 105 replies but now there's only 5?

I'm still quite new here,  do they get removed when they reach 100?

pollyanna1052

pollyanna1052 said:

worried33 said:

pollyanna1052 said:

@worried 33....you say you dont feel PIP is unfit for purpose....a spokesperson from Scope said it was and so many here can vouch for that with their results/assessments.....I went through the ESA system when I was of working age and dont remember it giving me quite as much anxiety...I do recall the form taking 3 hours to fill in, compared to 2 hours with PIP....I`m 67 now and had to retire on ill health grounds at 47!!! So I`ve had 20 glorious years at this game!

For me the PIP process was an ordeal with the waiting (ESA seems to have much quicker DM waiting times), but looking at the descriptors and the award lengths the basic principle of PIP in my opinion is fairer.

My PIP was a 5 year award, by the time I have my review it wouldnt surprise me if I have had 5 WCA's in that time, as on average I have a WCA annually.  5 WCA's is going to cause me a lot more distress than 1 PIP assessment.  I am also reasonably confident I will always meet the PIP descriptors I have, whilst with ESA I am relying on regulation 35, as the descriptors are really difficult to hit.  PIP doesnt have silly stuff like pretending someone can use a wheelchair they dont have.

To me the problems with PIP are that assessors are not applying descriptors correctly due to things like assuming someone isnt in pain because they dont have ultra powerful painkillers, the waiting times, and perhaps misleading expectations from claimants.  This last point is perhaps controversial.

As I see posts on here and other sites, people post they are ill, a relative is ill, they have X and Y condition, but they then have absolutely no idea what descriptors they hit (I am sure poppy can understand what I am saying here), they say because they are "ill" and that must mean they should qualify for PIP.  They then dont get the points and get angry.  Now I would absolutely love if the mobile descriptors were made to be looser, but they not, I dont get any mobility component but that doesnt mean I think PIP is entirely unfit for purpose.  Looking at the PIP descriptors vs DLA I honestly think its a better benefit.  I definitely think its better than ESA, if ESA didnt have regulations 26,35 as overrides there would be chaos as the majority on it would be found fit for work.

I do agree there is lots of ways to improve PIP, but do I think it should be entirely scrapped and something brand new drawn up? no.  I do have that opinion of ESA tho.    Maybe you are one of the lucky one's on ESA who keep getting deferred and that can mislead people, as that is not the norm and that makes me dislike ESA as well in that there is inconsistent treatment of people, some get deferred without any medical input on the decision purely based on local decision making, and that is unfair to those who dont get deferred.

I agree the ESA form is easier, but that form doesnt help the claimant, as the form appears to be designed to get minimal information which makes a FFW decision easier to make.  The PIP form is more in line with the descriptors.

I would love a link to the scope spokesperson tho as there must be a good reason for them saying what they did, but just remember my opinion is just my opinion.

If I was in power I would do the following.

1 - Impose a target for decision making times.  Employ new staff to make sure these targets can be met.
2 - Remove the ability for auditors to change descriptors.
3 - Make AP's and their HCP's accountable.
4 - Employ a system where there is specially trained staff available to deal with things like PIP application forms, so claimants know what descriptors they hit, and if they dont hit any or not enough make sure this is explained to them.  (CAB definitely doesnt cut it, relying on charities is a bad idea)
5 - Review the descriptors to see what groups of people are not meeting the current descriptors but do have additional living costs related to their functional disabilities, and if required add new descriptors to catch these people in the net.
6 - Scrap mandatory reconsideration's.
7 - Modernise the process so much more of it can be handled online, including submitting documents online.

As I see it, the ONLY thing wrong with PIP is that some assessors don't put the correct answers down when speaking to claimants. All the MRs and Tribunals are brought about because inaccuracies are put onto forms by assessors. There are plentiful examples of this when claimants see how their answers differ to their scores.

correction to my reply...I said all MRs and tribunal, when I should have said quite a lot of MRs and tribunals

worried33

pollyanna1052 said:

As I see it, the ONLY thing wrong with PIP is that some assessors don't put the correct answers down when speaking to claimants. All the MRs and Tribunals are brought about because inaccuracies are put onto forms by assessors. There are plentiful examples of this when claimants see how their answers differ to their scores.

If thats all you see wrong with it, then thats a far cry from what I thought you meant.

Adding accountability would go some way to addressing this as well as better training.  Just what I want to say tho, its one thing for an assessor to write something down blatantly untrue and another that they just have a different opinion to the claimant on something.

On my DLA assessment my assessor claimed I have 3 steps on my front door to get into the property (is one step) and offered an assessment that I could walk 200m on the basis I managed to walk 3m to my chair.

cristobal

@pollyana says the ONLY thing wrong with PIP is that some assessors don't put the correct answers down when speaking to claimants. All the MRs and Tribunals are brought about because inaccuracies are put onto forms by assessors. There are plentiful examples of this when claimants see how their answers differ to their scores.

Pollyana - there were quite a few inaccuracies in my report too - but isn't part of the reason why claimants don't get the score that they were expecting because they haven't understood the questions on the form when they filled it in. That's apparent from looking at the posts on here...

pollyanna1052

worried33 said:

pollyanna1052 said:

As I see it, the ONLY thing wrong with PIP is that some assessors don't put the correct answers down when speaking to claimants. All the MRs and Tribunals are brought about because inaccuracies are put onto forms by assessors. There are plentiful examples of this when claimants see how their answers differ to their scores.

If thats all you see wrong with it, then thats a far cry from what I thought you meant.

Adding accountability would go some way to addressing this as well as better training.  Just what I want to say tho, its one thing for an assessor to write something down blatantly untrue and another that they just have a different opinion to the claimant on something.

On my DLA assessment my assessor claimed I have 3 steps on my front door to get into the property (is one step) and offered an assessment that I could walk 200m on the basis I managed to walk 3m to my chair.

there you go...inaccuracies

pollyanna1052

cristobal said:

@pollyana says the ONLY thing wrong with PIP is that some assessors don't put the correct answers down when speaking to claimants. All the MRs and Tribunals are brought about because inaccuracies are put onto forms by assessors. There are plentiful examples of this when claimants see how their answers differ to their scores.

Pollyana - there were quite a few inaccuracies in my report too - but isn't part of the reason why claimants don't get the score that they were expecting because they haven't understood the questions on the form when they filled it in. That's apparent from looking at the posts on here...

Yes, people often use their diagnoses when telling us here what is wrong with them...when they need to be saying how that condition affects how they perform each descriptor.

thespiceman

Hello @paffuto10   In response to your question.  You need to click on the icon you will see two arrows.  At the bottom of this post.

Black ones on a white background.  Left means you go back wards to previous posts. The Right one forward to the new posts.

Hope that helps you.

Pleasure to do so please may I suggest to look at the community guide to familiar yourself.  Might be useful.

I do myself having been here for two years ongoing often forget.  You not alone.

Please take care.

@thespiceman

paffuto10

Thankyou 
@thespiceman

Roddy

It's always a good idea to keep a diary for a minimum of 2 weeks (and for as long as possible) before submitting your claim form. It's no good inventing things or exaggerating, and so simply write down each time over a 24hr period how your illness or disability has affected you, and in detail. The longer you can do this the better, as it will show the DWP how your disability issues affect YOU on a daily basis. This is important as another person with the same condition for example, may be affected differently. When I did this for my ESA entitlement it had a positive result and my 'diary of events' contributed a lot to the DWP decision to award me the enhanced rate of ESA. There is no reason why keeping a diary in this way couldn't be added to your claim for PIP 

cristobal

@roddy - I agree with you.

When I had my F2F i was asked about getting tired/ fatigued which prevents me doing lots of things. How often did this happen?

Initially I'd forgotten about my diary so I'd said "most days" or "nearly every day" which inexplicably the assessor summarised as 'a couple of days a week?"

Then I remembered that I'd got my diary - so I could confidently say that it wasn't "a couple of days per week" and gave the exact days and the exact times.

paffuto10

I do feel assessors should be better trained in things like autism, along with using basic common sense. 

I once read a case where a mum attended with her adult autistic son. 

Assessor asked the son how his autism affects him? 
The son replied "it doesn't"

Assessor had been given professional reports on his daily living needs and the mum had filled out the form with help from a solicitor friend. 

But of course, once her son had said that, there was no going back.
Zero points, lost at MR, finally won at appeal.

Surely in cases like this the assessor should take more notice of the professional reports? 
And use a bit of common sense? 

worried33

pollyanna1052 said:

there you go...inaccuracies

yep it happens, never disagreed with that point.

Roddy

paffuto10 said:

I do feel assessors should be better trained in things like autism, along with using basic common sense. 

I once read a case where a mum attended with her adult autistic son. 

Assessor asked the son how his autism affects him? 
The son replied "it doesn't"

Assessor had been given professional reports on his daily living needs and the mum had filled out the form with help from a solicitor friend. 

But of course, once her son had said that, there was no going back.
Zero points, lost at MR, finally won at appeal.

Surely in cases like this the assessor should take more notice of the professional reports? 
And use a bit of common sense? 

Quite how these so-called 'assessors' consider themselves more knowledgeable about ALL illnesses & disabilities than Hospital Specialists, is beyond me. Most of these assessors are not even GP's, they are Nurses. 

The very fact that so many disabled people are going through hell with this current system, speaks volumes about the incompetence and the disregard dished-out to us by these assessors. Many people with life-long disability & mobility issues are losing their benefits Left Right & Centre, and it just isn't on. I stand by own belief, that many of these assessors have already made up their minds before they've even met you face to face. When a person has previously been entitled to PIP for many years and the DWP decision was for 'indefinitely' what on Earth could have happened to make the person less entitled once these assessments were rolled out as they have been and continue to be? 

Profound Learning & Communication Disorders, do not improve just because some Nurse say's they do, and yet my son who needs, has always needed and will continue to need 24/7 around the clock care & supervision, had he's PIP stopped because of some Nurse... It's criminal, unethical and immoral. Sure he won his appeal, but that's not the point is it? Many do not and have been trying to survive on Jack-**** and without any rights to the services that they require. There is nothing correct with this abhorrent PIP assessment lark, and the sooner it is replaced with a professional and an understanding system the better, for countless disabled people the length and breadth of this Realm, and I don't care what anybody says to the contrary. The current PIP entitlement procedures, Suck. Period.    

poppy123456

paffuto10 said:

Where have all the replies gone? 
If you look under "recent discussions" it says 105 replies but now there's only 5?

I'm still quite new here,  do they get removed when they reach 100?

This is a huge thread and is 2 pages long, not sure what you're looking at but there's definitely more than just 5 replies. The only people that can remove comments/threads are admin.

cristobal

 When a person has previously been entitled to PIP for many years and the DWP decision was for 'indefinitely' what on Earth could have happened to make the person less entitled once these assessments were rolled out as they have been and continue to be? 

@roddy - I'd not heard about this before...are there people who have been granted PIP indefinitely who have had their award changed? I didn't actually realise that there is an 'indefinite' review date...