News update

marie21 said:

New guidance coming into effect this summer means people who are awarded the highest level of support under PIP– and where their needs are expected to stay the same or increase – will receive an ongoing award of PIP with a light touch review every 10 years.

As I said on a similar thread - the devil will be in the detail.
Personally I think that the publicity is over egging the reality.

Are we saying that for those on Enhanced Care & Mobility will get an automatic 10 year award?

What I would ask then what has changed? In the past 5 years after 2 assessments/re-assessments I have had that award but only been given a 3 year award - review after 2 years. The 3rd re-assessment reduced my award to 0 points unfortunately then I gave up. 

Some will still get a 10 year award no doubt about it, but no way will everybody - it goes against the intention of why PIP came about.

Further the statement - 'most severe health conditions' has yet to be defined. If the DWP provide a list then you can bet your last dollar that it will open up arguments about those who are on the fringes of those particular health conditions - ' he gets it so why can't I' attitude.

marie21 said:

I believe it's awarded for a long term illness or disability then it should be for life. No disability or long term illness will go away.  

I am totally in agreement with you, but it's up to the DWP on how they want to define 'long term illness or disability'. They can set a list of conditions, but how would that work as not everyone with that particular condition will have the same degree of issues than another would.
Then the argument could be that being awarded PIP does not depend on having a diagnosis.
Should someone who has say Type 1 diabetes which as we all know is for life be awarded the higher rates for life as against someone who has say COPD in all it's varying levels of outlook.

If this does come in there will be a lot of arguments as to what conditions should be included.
It's going to end up like DLA with the majority of the regulations being decided in the courts thus expanding the original intent to something that it was never intended to cover.