First time application for PIP

chiarieds said:

Hi @LMS88 - & welcome to the community. As you likely know, the assessor's report is just a recommendation, so you'll need to see what your actual decision letter says. If you appeal (the first stage is a Mandatory Reconsideration), then another decision maker will look at everything again even if you just query the daily living component. I wouldn't worry unduly as it's rare for this to result in a reduced award.

Depending on the severity of your epilepsy & its impact on your daily living, then looking at this again may also help you gain more points (if needed).

LMS88 said:

Hi all, 

This is my first attempt at applying for pip. For epilepsy, skeletal issues (back), and aphasia. 

I haven’t heard yet but been through a telephone assessment. 

I have received the PA3 form (I requested this incase I need to appeal) 

The report implies I scored a 16 for motability part and approximately a 6 for daily. 

Does anyone know if I get the motability part, but wish to appeal the Daily living part I would lose the motability part? 

I am so nervous by this whole experience it’s really a challenge process. 

The assessor really disregarded my Aphasia and the impact it has on my daily life and it felt really ignorant of my challenges. It felt it wasn’t assessed by someone of any understanding of the condition. Any thoughts and help I’d appreciate. 

chiarieds said:

Another decision maker will look at everything again even if you only raise issues with the daily living component, but, as mentioned above, it's very rare for them to reduce an award that's already in place.

You should put your MR in writing, saying where you feel you should have got points & why.

One thing to bear in mind, dependent on how your epilepsy affects you, is the following, which is taken from the Benefits & Work guide about PIP:

'Safety and supervision
Until now, the DWP have argued that a claimant can only score points for being unsafe if harm is likely to occur on more than 50% of the occasions on which they attempt an activity.

So a claimant with epilepsy who has seizures twice a week would not get points for needing supervision when cooking. This is because they could not show that it is ‘more likely than not’ that they will have a seizure on any given occasion when they prepare food.

However, on 9th March 2017, in CPIP/1599/2016 a panel of Upper Tribunal judges held that the DWP were wrong.

Instead, they said, the decision maker should look at whether there is a real possibility that harm might occur and also at how great the harm might be. The greater the potential harm, the less likely it needs to be that it would happen on any specific occasion.

So, if there is a real possibility that a claimant with epilepsy might have a seizure whilst cooking then then they reasonably require supervision for this activity, even though the chances of a seizure happening on any specific occasion may be quite small, they should score points for needing supervision even if they don’t actually have anyone to provide it.

But the Upper Tribunal went even further than this.

They ruled that where a claimant is at risk all the time, then they may also be at risk when carrying out PIP activities that do not carry any additional likelihood of harm.

So, a claimant may not be at any additional risk of harm if they have a seizure when using the toilet or taking medication, for example. But, because they are at risk whatever they are doing, then we would argue that they still reasonably require supervision during these activities, because they cannot do them safely without supervision.'