Re: PIP MR

sceneparade

So, yesterday I received my MR letter. Originally they rejected my claim for PIP, but the MR letter stated they will pay me the higher rate care component but no mobility component. 

As a result of my condition, I feel I would received lower rate mobility, as I did when on DLA. The reason they gave for declining my application for mobility was because I have a driving licence. However, this argument makes no sense, because people with physical disabilities have a driving licence. My disability would meet the criteria of lower mobility due to anxiety and need for support wherever I go, or whenever I leave the house. 

I would like peoples advice on this. 

In addition, does the tribunal require evidence from me and the DWP to make a decision, or do they search for the evidence themselves, i.e. do they contact my GP, doctors, DWP, ESA, DVLA etc. 

poppy123456

Hi,

Great news on the MR decision changing.

Whether you request the Tribunal is your decision but i'd advise you getting some face to face advice before you request it. It's impossible to give advice on an internet forum, whether you'll be entitled to any mobility will depend on the reasons why you need support when you go out.

It's the claimant responsibility to send evidence to support your claim and the Tribunal will rarely request any medical evidence. If it's needed they sometimes ask you to get medical records from certain dates.

Real life examples are good for your submission if you do request the Tribunal. Explain why you need support when you go out and what happened or would happen if you went out alone, or what happened the last time you went alone. As advised, it really depends how your conditions affect you.

cristobal

@sceneparade - does the letter actually say that they have refused your mobility claim because you have a driving licence?

Seems very strange doesn't it, since driving isn't one of the things that is considered under mobility?

Also it doesn't mean that you actually drive - just that you're licensed to do so...

OverlyAnxious

cristobal said:

@sceneparade - does the letter actually say that they have refused your mobility claim because you have a driving licence?

Seems very strange doesn't it, since driving isn't one of the things that is considered under mobility?

Also it doesn't mean that you actually drive does it, just that you're licensed to do so...

I think this is a new DWP standard to get out of paying mobility for mental issues...  My MR said exactly the same thing regarding a driving licence.  What's odd is that I didn't challenge or even mention the mobility side in my MR as I knew I had no chance of getting it with the type of problems I have.  (I don't fit into their perfect descriptors)

They're just trying to prove that you have the cognitive ability to process the outside world without any assistance, but it doesn't make much sense.  I got my licence 10 years ago and have never been 'checked' since...I doubt I'd pass a test today...  In fact I wouldn't even cope with having the tester as a passenger!! 

sceneparade

Hi @cristobal, 

The letter stated that I am vulnerable when out alone and would need social support. She said that because I knew how to use Google Maps I can find my way around places, and therefore plan a route unaided and that I know how to cross the road. This is all nonsense, because the letter sent in by my doctor sates I am a safety risk to myself and others, and it also stated I have been knocked down as a result of my condition and not knowing how to cross the road. So I am not sure how they put I can cross the road safely when the medical records says otherwise. 

The part about driving licence said this "The activity of driving a car is in itself a multitask activity requiring significant physical function in terms of grip, power and lower joint movements in conjunction with substantial cognitive powers of thought, perception, memory, reasoning, concentration, judgement and coordination. Although there is a consistent restriction in motivation to undertake tasks, all the evidence presented suggests that you can manage this independently and you know how to use maps". 

All the above is inconsistent. Because they agree I can't cook food for myself due to safety issues, that being outside by myself I would be taken advantage of and be vulnerable. This, together with being knocked down, as reaffirmed by medical records, and together with anxiety, would make driving impossible alone.It doesn't make sense. The report is very contradictory. 

sceneparade

Hi @OverlyAnxious, 

I agree. I licence means nothing. Medical records state safety risk, vulnerable person, taken advantage of etc. I took my test 12 years ago, but would struggle now. I am now a passenger in cars, as I would struggle. 

The Google Maps thing is odd. I have a report that states I was unable to understand the pictures on a puzzle (I didn't see the picture was a bat). So if I cannot pick out pictures on puzzles I wouldn't be able to read a Google Map. - it makes no sense. I might be able to access it, but not use it. It states I know how to cross the road. It sounds like they haven't properly read the report from the doctors. Because they stated I have been involved in car accidents as a result of not knowing how to cross the road. A report states I don't make eye contact, which was undertaken by expert doctors in their field. Yet the DWP report basically said the doctors didn't know what they were doing because I was fine. Again, no sense. 

cristobal

The part about driving licence said this "The activity of driving a car is in itself a multitask activity requiring significant physical function in terms of grip, power and lower joint movements in conjunction with substantial cognitive powers of thought, perception, memory, reasoning, concentration, judgement and coordination. Although there is a consistent restriction in motivation to undertake tasks, all the evidence presented suggests that you can manage this independently and you know how to use maps". 

@sceneparade - the quote doesn't mention driving licence, it's about the skills and function needed to drive a car...

Personally if you don't drive, and the DWP are assuming that you do because you have a licence, then I would point this out to them...

Good luck anyway...

sceneparade

Thanks @cristobal, 

Does this mean I have to prove I don't drive? Or do I just let the tribunal chase it up via DVLA? I am not sure how it works.

cristobal

@sceneparade - sorry, I'm not sure...but it's for you to send the evidence to the tribunal

Personally I'd write a letter to the DWP pointing out that you don't drive, don't own a car, aren't an insured driver on anyone else's car etc and when you last drove and that to assume that you do is wrong. I don't think they have to take it into account but I don't think it will harm...

As Poppy said i think I would get F2f advice locally as well...

OverlyAnxious

Reading your posts so far it sounds like you should receive higher rate mobility - as in can't undertake any journey without assistance?  Lower mobility is about £20 a week, so might not be worth the hassle and risk of losing the daily living that you now have.

If you go to tribunal, you should focus on the problems you have with the descriptor (as Poppy stated above) rather than focussing on the driving licence.  I think it really is just a tick box within the assessment, that if you're claiming for mental health then they'll check to see if you've got a licence, I doubt it'll even be mentioned at tribunal, but if it is you can just explain that you passed a while ago and no longer drive - and give the reasons for that.

poppy123456

sceneparade said:

Thanks @cristobal, 

Does this mean I have to prove I don't drive? Or do I just let the tribunal chase it up via DVLA? I am not sure how it works.

It's very unlikely that DVLA will be contacted by anyone. Having a driving license doesn't mean you drive. It will be up to you to prove that you're unable to go out alone and for what reasons. Sounds like you already sent evidence stating why and what would happen if you did.

There's no risk in taking it to Tribunal because if they planned on lowering your existing award then they would warn you before doing this. This will then give you the option of either taking what you already have or risking it and carry on with the Tribunal.

Willwill

Strange I no longer drive .I do not have a car ,I use taxi to my doctors  which my mobility allowance is a help for this I also pay a little for petrol for my daughter to assist me in transport , I thought  getting about is how you get mobility allowance in how daily life is  for you  without it !! I think this is DWP auditor (manager) in your area of DWP....  Going off subject the Auditor stated in my case on paper on my  MR that " I do not take any medication for my anxiety ""

yet they had medical evidence of this 

anyway "you do not need a licence to be passenger"" you need mobility allowance to help you  for mobility ,,
saying that you can get a car on mobility and have 3 named driver on the lease  to transport you

All the best 
regards Will   

[Deleted User]

Hi, please try and get face to face advice and help with this. 

I'm going through something myself where the assessor removed or changed any points that indicates that I have mental health problems when nothing has changed since my first assessment my case is a bit weird though and I have posted about it somewhere else so I won't go into it. I've just done an MR with the help of Welfare Rights.

Good luck with it all.

sceneparade

@OverlyAnxious

Just clarification on this: "I think it really is just a tick box within the assessment, that if you're claiming for mental health then they'll check to see if you've got a licence, I doubt it'll even be mentioned at tribunal, but if it is you can just explain that you passed a while ago and no longer drive - and give the reasons for that." 

Are you saying the DWP check that I have a licence with the DWP? But as you said: it proves I no longer drive

sceneparade

@poppy123456

I have applied to a tribunal, but I stated I wanted to appeal the mobility component only. Is this correct? I haven't asked for the tribunal to look at my care component. 

And they haven't warned me about lowering my higher rate care component. They just told me that if I am unhappy I can proceed to a tribunal. There was no threats of reducing my rate of care component. 

sceneparade

@WF2k

I agree, By their own descriptors I should have scored about 30 points. But they gave me 17. I won't complain because it's still higher rate care component. But I agree they don't even follow their own descriptors. I got a letter stating I can't go out by myself and that I am a safety risk. Therefore I would meet one of the mobility descriptors. However, they said I met none. 

poppy123456

sceneparade said:

@poppy123456

I have applied to a tribunal, but I stated I wanted to appeal the mobility component only. Is this correct? I haven't asked for the tribunal to look at my care component. 

And they haven't warned me about lowering my higher rate care component. They just told me that if I am unhappy I can proceed to a tribunal. There was no threats of reducing my rate of care component. 

Yes, you can state which you disagree with.

If they plan on lowering an existing award they won't warn you now, as you've only just received the MR decision you must have only requested the Tribunal today. The warning will come at a much later date, either by letter before a hearing or on the day of the hearing. If it's the day of the hearing then it will be adjourned for you to decide what you want to do.

sceneparade

@poppy123456

Okay thanks. 

Ae they likely to lower my award if I have submitted a lot of medical records to support my claim?What would be the point if they knew I had medical evidence. Thats why they changed it to higher rate, because of the medical evidence. 

sceneparade

@poppy123456 @cristobal @OverlyAnxious @WF2k

If anyone could advise me on whether this would meet the mobility component of assessment. Because from what people have advised me, I should meet it. These are extracts from my letter from my doctor to the DWP, which, as a result, changed my award to higher rate care component. 

This is what the doctor put: 

"As a result of Autism, he finds it difficult to engage with others. This is because it makes him stressed and depressed that he cannot function. This is exemplified in the case where we took him shopping, and whilst on his ipodtouch, a member of the public asked if he could use his ipodtouch. Subsequently, X was deceived and he never saw it again. As a consequence of his difficulties with social interactions and communications, whereby he finds reading others hard, he was left stressed and depressed and would then self-harm.

In addition, X can get anxious around people he doesn’t know, particularly in public where there are lots of people. To illustrate this further, he recently had to attend hospital with his brother due to renal colic. As a result of speaking to the doctor, he felt anxious and quickly left. Accordingly, he needs help and support from someone he knows well to be able to interact with people he doesn’t know well, or else he spends most of his time at home because he fears intimacy – as we have been informed by numerous psychiatrists - when engaging with people, which can stress him out. 

What is more, as a result of his EUPD and his ASD he can become impulsive and irate, which he can act out on others. This alienates others and compounds his difficulties.  

Moreover, as a result of difficulties interacting with others, it can lead to depression and anxiety, which results in self-harm.  On two occasions this has resulted in him being sectioned, once at Prospect Park psychiatric hospital and the other the Ladywell Unit at University Hospital Lewisham. Furthermore, his depression and difficulties when interacting with others has led to psychosis (hence psychosis-NOS)

Moreover, he is too helpful and trusting of people and he gets taken advantage of. For instance, he bought a computer online and was told to make the transfer directly into the seller’s bank account, which he did. Subsequently, he never received the goods and never got his money back. This resulted in him loosing £450 and made him depressed and stressed. 

Seven, the difficulties following an unfamiliar journey without assistance. 

X struggles to follow the route of an unfamiliar journey without another person. For example, he had to attend the PIP assessment with a family member because he cannot work out how to get somewhere by himself. He checked online to find its location and he still got it wrong. This made him stressed. 

 In addition, he doesn’t like public transport. It makes him feel anxious around other people because of his fear of them. This in the past has resulted in paranoia and psychosis (hence Psychosis-NOS). 

Furthermore, he needs someone with him when he is outside because he is too trusting. Without someone to help him, people take advantage of him."

poppy123456

sceneparade said:

@poppy123456

Okay thanks. 

Ae they likely to lower my award if I have submitted a lot of medical records to support my claim?What would be the point if they knew I had medical evidence. Thats why they changed it to higher rate, because of the medical evidence. 

Totally impossible to answer that question im afraid.

For the mobility part then you should concentrate on the reasons why you need someone with you when you go out and why you can't plan the route of a journey without another person.

cristobal

@sceneparade - I agree with Poppy - look at the descriptor for 'Planning and following journeys and concentrate on showing how you meet them. Give examples...

I believe that a key thing is whether someone suffers Overwhelming Psychological Distress, rather than anxiety, so it might not be that helpful that your doctor has written things like 'he doesn't like public transport', 'he needs someone with him ...because he is too trusting'  - which don't support the mobility component. If you look back at your previous posts this was mentioned on there...

Personally I would seek face to face advice near to you. A professional will be better able to advise how your doctor's comment are likely to be interpreted by a tribunal and whether to pursue it or not...