UK: Disability benefits (ESA and PIP) - news and updates 2021 - 2022

@Simbindi I am guessing that the Facebook group I am in feel that what they do is similar, as they provide a buddy service (which I used) to look over your paperwork. They do all that for free and it's very good advice.

I asked the DWP for the assessor's report weeks before my son had his decision, and was quite shocked by it. However it was difficult to challenge it as the issues were quite subtle to deal with. I doubt that the DWP will read all my stuff on it as I have written at some length on them, maybe too many pages I feel now. I had a recording of the interview and I can see that he misconstrued some things that my son said to back up his points, and he was able to quote from this psych as his prize witness as it were - kept calling it the 'doctor's factual report' when it was far from that.

It took me a long time to sort it all out as I thought that the GP surgery had also written something on this report or collated it. We did 2 Subject Access Reports to the GP and to the DWP but the GP surgery came up with nothing, and the DWP took 40 days to come up with just this one report from the Psych. In fact the Assessor had also asked his neuropsychiatrist for a report but as it arrived a bit later on it was not sent to the DWP we think, and if they had read that too they could have seen that he had relapsed. All of this is now sent on to the DWP for the MR.

So I think that this would not all have got sorted out by someone else, maybe even Fightback, as it's tricky to comb through it all. My son's mental health issues mean that he sleeps a lot and is really out of things and not able to communicate at normal times either. It took me 4 weeks to write the Recon letter as I began on it before the DWP report came in knowing it would be bad. As things happened, the Assessor recommended nothing and the DWP decision was for 8 points which as we know is useless.

 

Yes, that is useful. I know some of it though, via the Facebook group and other places, so I did quote a couple of things in my MR. It is putting it into non legal language that is tricky.

Actually I have done 2 Reconsiderations already - one for myself previously and the last one for PIP for my son and won both of them, so I am hopeful if they read it properly that this one will succeed.

 

Thank you, yes, @Simbindi When I wrote to the MPs I made this specific point that it was against 'natural justice' not to consider all the evidence and I think that the new social worker's report should clinch it really if nothing else. What I suspect they may do is give my son the lower rate of daily living, (with or without the mobility payment), and then because we are both exhausted by the process no doubt we will take what we are given, as neither of us want the hassle of going on to a Tribunal.

The thing about PIP is that if you get either rate of Daily Living then you also get the Severe Disability Enhancement, and so you suddenly get a big jump (or loss) in income either way, so this is why it's worth taking it. I am kind of hopeful that if they do give him the lower rate, that he will also get the mobility component (even the lower one) as that would almost then pull him up to what he was on re Enhanced Daily Living.

but I am speculating here....!

 

I hope it goes smoothly, @Agapanthus, and you don't have to take it any further. It's all such hard work, mentally, physically and emotionally.

For anyone else who has a renewal coming up, the Benefits & Work website offers training modules on PIP, including caselaw, that are suitable for people who are not professional advisers. I think they're about £6 each for members; I'm thinking of trying them myself when it comes round to preparing for my own reapplication in a couple years' time.

I've also been helped by Fightback in the past, but only really to look over my draft after I'd read some of their advice. After a lifetime of making lengthy, detailed arts funding arguments, I'm fairly used to studying criteria and filling in forms...well, at least as long as I happen to be well enough at the time.

 

I am really frustrated by my ME limitations as I would love to help more people. I am currently helping someone with a complex PIP MR case. People should be aware (and it is stated in the B&W appeals guide) that you can submit the MR even after the initial month deadline (which is usually only 2 weeks because the decision letter takes time to arrive). You have up to 12 months if you can provide sound reasons for the delay. Obviously just getting information from the DWP via a SARS takes longer than 30 days in reality (allowing for postage). Getting specialist advice, obtaining reports etc, claimant's illness and cognitive problems can all be cited to explain a delay in return of the MR.

I found some useful documents in the Fightback VIP library but haven't tried their chat function yet. In my friend's case, I know there isn't any relevant caselaw as some of the issues are pandemic related (hence wouldn't have reached upper tribunal level even if other claimants have faced the same problems).

 

I agree, it's definitely worth involving the MP. I am doing this for my friend too.

I involved my MP in my last PIP prior to the face to face. I received a supporting letter from her (and she is a non-controversial Conservative who always toes the party line). Being able to show this letter in the face to face was very useful. Previously I had been given a 2 year award, but with the letter demonstrating to the HCP that the MP was monitoring my case, I was given the indefinite award (with the 10 year light touch reviews).

 

I was going to involve my MP in our appeal, but then Boris went and called a general election just at the wrong moment

 

Yes in theory but in my experience it depends on the decision maker, mine just rubber stamped a flawed initial assessment which had several inconsistencies which made it possible to appeal. They had access to the same medical evidence which the tribunal said they took note of at my appeal, so the MR was not fair or comprehensive and was probably rushed under DWP management pressure IMHO.

My point is dont be disheartened if you dont get a reasonable MR outcome and do appeal if you feel it is warranted. If appealing it is best to get all the medical evidence you can as it is your last opportunity for a fair hearing but HMCTS are judicial not governmental so you should get a fair hearing if you can present a valid case.

 

Personally i'm afraid i found Fightback all but useless. It was surreal TBH. I paid for the VIP service but it was worse than no help at all. My situation is quite complex & when i asked questions via email she replied to questions that i hadnt asked, which was very confusing & misleading, & then when i tried to clarify she didnt read my replies properly & just answered a completely different question. It was like we were in 2 different conversations.

The same happened on the phone, she just kept telling me how wonderful and amazing Fightback were, but never actually seemed to understand the nuances of ME, despite bragging about how much she knew at every opportunity. I found the whole thing quite distressing due to the nature of it being about PIP, & it was a huge waste of energy.

I am so sorry @Agapanthus that you and your son have to go through this criminally unjust, egregiously harsh process. It is a blight on our nation IMO. I hope you manage to get the outcome you deserve

 

@Simbindi I was interested to hear that you had been able to involve your MP at a very early stage, rather than waiting until the Reconsideration stage or later, and am very pleased to hear for you that it was taken note of at the Face to Face, and that you had such a good result.

Not sure that would have been so easy for my son what with being locked down and having the phone appointment, but it is worth considering for sure.

 

It is very disappointing indeed if the Decision Maker does not look properly at inconsistencies in what the assessor has written, for either the decision or the Reconsideration.

If they don't look at the extra evidence that we have sent though (it's very substantial as it's a social worker's report of many pages), then they certainly won't have tried very hard.

I have also written them 16 pages on the subject but it may be too much! I went through it with a fine toothcomb and tried to do bolded headings for them to find the info. I also did quotes from the evidence sent included in the text, and went through all the relevant descriptors to demonstrate where they were wrong.

Somehow the Tribunal will have to be done if the result is not changed, but I dread the whole thing. It's very hard to help someone in another county when I am ill myself.

 

Well unfortunately @JemPD that rather confirms the views I read on this free support FB Benefits Group on this organisation. Also if it is a case of having to do it yourself ultimately then I might as well do it myself, with or without their help.

I do use Benefits and Work booklets which are excellent, but do find them a bit dense at times, and struggle to find relevant stuff in them for people with mental health issues. I don't know how someone with mental health issues could cope with this alone.

Yes, I do agree that the system is a blight. In fact it discriminates against the very people who it is supposed to help - those who are the most vulnerable would find it the hardest to struggle though this system without any support from others.

 

I am autistic as well as having the severe ME. I had had a meltdown in my first face to face, where I was forced by ATOS to attend an inappropriate venue (a public sports centre) for my assessment. That was many years ago now.

I got a home assessment the second time around, although my daughter still had to formally complain to a manager to get me that in the initial stages (they sent me an appointment at that same sports centre, despite the HCP from the first assessment recommending future home assessments for me in her report due to my inability to cope at interview). So we pre-emptively involved the MP the second time around.

I have learnt a lot about 'the system' in the intervening years.

 

Thank you for sharing that @Simbindi That must have been awful for you.

Previously we have had my son's Dr write to say that he must be seen at home, but they have then done a paper assessment. This time of course it was via telephone so we could not get that changed so easily.

He is polite usually on the phone, though he does have anger outbursts but I was there on the phone, and his carer in the room. He is intelligent and comes across quite well so of course all the usual positive comments are then made about how well he sounds etc etc that are supposed to negate the fact that he has a severe mental illness. It's a ridiculous abusive system.

Anyway, I can see that involving the MP at the early stage was a canny move. We may have to try the same in future.

 

To be honest it's quite a relief to hear that, i questioned if i was going crackers at the time because everyone had raved about them so much.

Anyway fingers crossed for you that it goes well.

@Simbindi what an horrific experience for you, i'm so sorry

 

Chronic Illness Inclusion responds to the Department of Work and Pensions’ Green Paper on Health and Disability.

"Summary: disability benefit assessments must be redesigned to account for the cognitive fatigue and dysfunction that limits work and daily living with ELCI.

In October CII submitted a comprehensive response to Shaping Future Support, the government’s proposals on the future of disability benefits. We also contributed to a response by the DPO Forum, a coalition of Disabled People’s Organisations, of which CII is a member.

Both of these responses addressed key concerns with the systems for PIP and ESA (and its equivalent under Universal Credit) that affect all disabled people. We responded to proposals about advocacy support and for making the claims process less burdensome. We especially highlighted the lack of any mention of the need to alleviate poverty and destitution among disabled people who are too unwell to work or are excluded from employment through discrimination. We argue that the level of financial support for disabled people in the social security system must be urgently and substantially increased.

In our own response we also highlighted an issue that particularly affects disabled people with ELCI and other energy limiting impairments. That is the fact the assessment criteria, known as the ‘descriptors’, used by both PIP and WCA are not designed to capture and account for our lived experience of impairment and disability. This is widey known."

https://chronicillnessinclusion.org...ognitive-dysfunction-and-disability-benefits/

 

More of a general PIP-related article

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/me...-overturned/ar-AARIUC3?ocid=ASUDHP&li=BBoPWjQ

I can't quote anything from it, but: 67% of decisions have been changed from the original one; Scope is calling for applicants to get an assessor who is familiar with their condition. I wonder how many decisions relating to PwME would have been overturned if that had been the case.

 

DWP admits assessment system is ‘fragmented’ and ‘inefficient’

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/dwp-admits-assessment-system-is-fragmented-and-inefficient/

(you can 'listen' to the article on this website)

 

Merged thread

Over 118,000 people denied compensation from DWP after benefits error cut payments

https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/dwp-esa

13 January 2022

Over 118,000 people with disabilities and health problems are facing injustice by the Department of Work and Pensions after being denied the right to compensation following a government blunder over benefit payments, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has said today.

Ombudsman Rob Behrens is calling on the Government to urgently rectify the injustice, something which it is so far refusing to do.

The call comes after a PHSO investigation revealed a seriously ill woman had her benefits payments severely cut by around £80 a week due to a government blunder, leaving her unable to heat her home and buy food. The same error has affected over 118,000 people with disabilities and health problems but they are being denied the opportunity to claim compensation for the same mistake.

62-year-old Ms U, who lives alone, should have received her Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) payments in full when she was moved from Incapacity Benefit. But like thousands of others her benefits payments were mistakenly cut.

As someone recovering from heart bypass surgery and managing multiple health problems including an autoimmune disease, severe mental health problems and hypertension, this had a devastating impact on Ms U’s health, wellbeing and finances. For five years she received only around half the amount the government says is the minimum requirement for a person with severe disability needs.

Ms U could not afford to heat her property or buy the food she needed to stay healthy. Her mental and physical health declined drastically - her hair fell out, she lost weight and her mental health deteriorated.

The error also prevented Ms U from getting other benefits she was eligible for, including free medical prescriptions to manage her many health issues, funding to buy a washing machine and urgently needed dental care. She was at risk of hypothermia and her arthritis got worse because she lost out on £700 in Warm Home discounts.

This shocking case was brought to the Ombudsman’s attention by Ms U’s local welfare rights adviser. He explained that she had suffered extreme financial and personal hardship because the DWP made an error when it changed the benefits she was receiving. DWP moved her to ESA, a benefit paid to people who are unable or struggle to work because of health problems and disabilities. The Department started transferring people who were receiving certain benefits onto ESA in 2011.

Ms U, along with thousands of other eligible people, only received payments based on her national insurance contributions when she should also have received payments based on her income. A National Audit Office report into the ESA error found that it likely affected people with ‘the most limiting illnesses or disabilities’. It also means that thousands of people may have missed out on related benefits and experienced extreme hardship because of it, like Ms U.

DWP has since corrected the ESA error and set about paying arrears to those affected. But it still will not allow them to claim compensation for the life-changing impact this error may have had.

Ombudsman Rob Behrens is calling on DWP to remedy this injustice:

more at link

 

I didn't realise that what was called Income related ESA had been abolished; With the roll out of UC, 'Old style ESA' has been replaced with 'New style ESA'

https://askcpag.org.uk/content/207210/old-style-esa-who-can-get-it