LEAP reviews for PIP Mobility

poppy123456

xxgaynorxx said:

Thankyou for the link. I have read it and yes appeal person 1 was denied. But like I stated it is down on my initial pip form and assessors report that I go out with my son so 1E wouldn’t apply (although it has been). Sorry I find it hard to put my explanation in writing). 

If you disagreed with that decision at the time what you should have done was appeal it by first requesting the Mandatory Reconsideration.

xxgaynorxx

poppy123456 said:

xxgaynorxx said:

I was awarded 1E for 10 years in 2015. I stated I get distressed (massive panic attacks) to the point of debilitation. I also stated I can go out with my son only. I also went to the face to face with my CPN. 

The assessor AND CPN were under the impression I wouldn’t be able to score F as it didn’t mention overwhelming psychological distress (at that time). The laws and assessment rules have changed since. And that descriptor E was more suitable. Maybe I’m wrong but I have been allowed LEAP team to look at my case again and am awaiting decision. 

According to this link they are only considering claims that had a decision on or after November 28th 2016. See link. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-changes/overwhelming-psychological-distress-and-journeys-changes-to-pip-law-from-28-november-2016

The leap team have accepted my review. 

xxgaynorxx

poppy123456 said:

xxgaynorxx said:

Thankyou for the link. I have read it and yes appeal person 1 was denied. But like I stated it is down on my initial pip form and assessors report that I go out with my son so 1E wouldn’t apply (although it has been). Sorry I find it hard to put my explanation in writing). 

If you disagreed with that decision at the time what you should have done was appeal it by first requesting the Mandatory Reconsideration.

Thankyou. I was advised wrongly by my CPN who was under the impression (as was the assessor and dwp) that E was the only descriptor that included psychological distress. After the law was changed I was advised to wait for the leap team to get in touch with me. By hindsight yes an MR would have been the right way to go at that time. But to be fair everyone at that time was arguing about the wordings and rules of those particular descriptors.