nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

We want to hear from you: please tell us about your experience of the online community.

Advice please (in the correct area this time)

Cartini

Hi all,

I have a lady friend who was awarded full PIP last October (21) for Parkinson's. However it is a relatively short dated award with a review in October 24. As you know (or may not know) Parkinson's is an incurable medical condition, so I (and my friend) are at a loss as to why she was awarded a (short) time limited PIP.

After the excellent advice on here, I`ve talked to her about raising a Mandatory Reconsideration. She`s interested, but concerned about the 13 month maximum time limit. Would something on this line be acceptable by DWP:

I had very little help for my PIP application, so when I was awarded a date limited award (Oct 2024) I wasn`t aware that I could appeal the length of that award."

I`ve explained that an award can be made worse / removed following an MR (but it`s unlikely), but it`s highly likely not to change at the MR stage which will mean an appeal to tribunal.

In the experience of the advisers (or anyone else with similar experiences), would stating that she wasn`t aware of the MR process be accepted by DWP?

Thank you,

Andy

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

calcotti

As long as she is within the thirteen months DWP are very unlikely to refuse to accept the MR, to that extent, in my opinion, any reasonable explanation is fine. I’d DWP do refuse to accept the MR you can go straight to tribunal.

For the MR itself you MR request shouldexplicitly say that you wish a reconsideration of the period of the award only. As long as that is clear all other aspects of the award will not be looked at. The grounds for the MR are, as you indicate, that the underlying health condition is a progressive disease and you are therefore not going to get better.

Cartini

calcotti said:

As long as she is within the thirteen months DWP are very unlikely to refuse to accept the MR, to that extent, in my opinion, any reasonable explanation is fine. I’d DWP do refuse to accept the MR you can go straight to tribunal.

For the MR itself you MR request shouldexplicitly say that you wish a reconsideration of the period of the award only. As long as that is clear all other aspects of the award will not be looked at. The grounds for the MR are, as you indicate, that the underlying health condition is a progressive disease and you are therefore not going to get better.

Hi Calcotti,

Thank you very much.

Andy

nasturtium

Hi Cartini

Here is a link to the PIPInfo website with some information and Case Law that you might find helpful for fixed term awards and award lengths https://pipinfo.net/issues/length-of-awards

poppy123456

If it's gets to Tribunal and it very likely will then they also need to make sure they make it clear they are happy with the award and are just appealing the length only.

Cartini

nasturtium said:

Hi Cartini

Here is a link to the PIPInfo website with some information and Case Law that you might find helpful for fixed term awards and award lengths https://pipinfo.net/issues/length-of-awards

Hi Nasturtium,

Thank you very much.

Andy

Cartini

poppy123456 said:

If it's gets to Tribunal and it very likely will then they also need to make sure they make it clear they are happy with the award and are just appealing the length only.

Hi poppy,

I`ve drafted a letter already and I`ve made sure that my friend is not contesting DL or Mob, but is contesting the length. When it goes to tribunal (I, like you, think it will), I will also help and make sure the length is the only part contested.

Thank you,

Andy

Cartini

Hi all,

I`d like to say, on behalf of my friend, a big thank you.

The MR to reconsider the length of her claim appears to have been successful, but the "awarding letter" is a bit contradictory.

On the first page of the Mandatory Reconsideration Notice, the dates have not changed. They remain:
You can get this from 3 June 2021 to 10th October 2024

Then at the end of the letter, under "My decision":
"Thank you for telling us how your health conditions affect you.. <I`ve left out the usual bumph>.....
Due to the nature of your conditions a 10 year award is reasonable."

We both interpret this as a successful MR and that the review period is now 10 years. I know DWP are known for making mistakes with documentation (they certainly did with the letter they sent me saying they have changed their mind), so would you suggest "leaving as is" or contacting DWP to confirm the change?

Andy

poppy123456

Great news. I would advise them to ring PIP to ask about the award length. If it's a 10 year award i would also ask them to send out a new decision with the correct award length on it.

Cartini

poppy123456 said:

Great news. I would advise them to ring PIP to ask about the award length. If it's a 10 year award i would also ask them to send out a new decision with the correct award length on it.

Thank you very much poppy - I will let her know

calcotti

Sounds like a typing error. I would recommend he rings them and asks them to correct the letter. I would say that you note the award says that a 10 year award is reasonable so you assume the end date of 10th October 2024 is incorrect, could they please correct it.

Leaving it as is means that he is uncertain of how long his award is which is rather unsatisfactory.

nasturtium

Excellent News Andy

A quick question just out of interest.... Did you use any of the case law for "length of award" from the pipinfo site I posted a link to?

Cartini

nasturtium said:

Excellent News Andy
A quick question just out of interest.... Did you use any of the case law for "length of award" from the pipinfo site I posted a link to?

Thank you nasturtium, my friend is chuffed.

I looked over it, thank you for the link, but my friend didn`t want it to be too complicated. So after a couple of lines explaining why the MR was late, that her condition was lifelong and progressive and:

Daily Living - not contested.

Mobility - not contested.

Length of award - contested.

We submitted the letter. I was expecting to have to encourage her to go to tribunal, but thankfully that`s now not the case.

Andy

Cartini

calcotti said:

Sounds like a typing error. I would recommend he rings them and asks them to correct the letter. I would say that you note the award says that a 10 year award is reasonable so you assume the end date of 10th October 2024 is incorrect, could they please correct it.

Leaving it as is means that he is uncertain of how long his award is which is rather unsatisfactory.

Thank you calcotti

Cartini

Removed because I posted the same response twice 🥴

L_Volunteer

Ha, that's ok @Cartini. If you need any further support please don't hesitate to let us know.

We are all here for you and listening to you. Otherwise, we wish you all the best