PIP Mob 2: is ‘carrying’ over and above the scope of what the Regs mean by ‘assistance’?

My client has got 4 points for Mob 2b, ie >50m and <200m EITHER AIDED OR UNAIDED (my emphasis). 2016 Atos HCP report states “she feels she can walk for 2-5 minutes with support and at a slow pace before she needs to stop and rest.” Previous Atos HCP report in 2014 (when client got standard Mob) states “Walks with mother carrying some of her weight.”

In the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013 “aided” means with (a) the use of an aid or appliance; or (b) supervision, prompting or ASSISTANCE (my emphasis).

Is there a defined boundary around ‘assistance’ with walking?  Like lending someone an arm or shoulder to lean on, but not beyond? Surely, if the carer has to physically support someone on their doddery legs, that becomes carrying rather than just assisting. And therefore it should not be subsumed within ‘aided’ walking.

This reminds me of the distinction in DLA Mob where someone with SMI could get HR Mob because they needed 2 carers to hold them down, as it were, rather than just the one to guide and assist them on their outdoor journey. Is there maybe a similar argument to be made between PIP mob 2b and 2f?

I’ve had a quick search of PIPINFO and the forum, but not found anything. On-topic threads are at http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/9201/ and http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/9210/ but they’re mainly about walking sticks rather than physical human helpers.

So, to summarise, my question is, can someone who walks with mother carrying some of her weight count as 2f on the grounds that carrying is over and above the scope of what the Regs mean by ‘assistance’?

You could consider arguing it in terms of the reg 4 stuff about safe, acceptable standard, repeatably etc. Taking some of someone’s weight might be reasonable if you are helping them a few meters, like from bed to the bathroom, but walking 50+ metres like that isn’t really practical or safe is it? Note that the ‘safely’ is about harm to the claimant or another person. Is it really safe for the mother (or anyone else) to be taking her weight for such a distance? If it was a staff member providing that help would it pass a risk assessment?

Jane

I think your argument is spot on Robbie. Difficult to see why it shouldn’t apply.