× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Disability benefits  →  Thread

“We observed you walking 9m slowly with support from your wife but because you said you visit a supermarket…..

Nicola M
forum member

Age UK I&A Calderdale & Kirklees

Send message

Total Posts: 3

Joined: 13 November 2016

we have decided you can stand and then move more than 50 metres but no more than 200 metres, either aided or
unaided”

When he visits said supermarket with his wife, he sits on a bench or in the car or in the cafe and waits for her, not jogging around the place with wild abandon. Which of course he tried to explain at his f2f but fell on deaf ears.

No mobility award. From a HR M DLA who have had to return their motability car and is now stuck in his home as he can’t walk, can’t use public transport and can’t afford to replace the car.

So fed up with seeing decisions like this day in day out.

[ Edited: 8 Feb 2017 at 09:47 pm by Nicola M ]
Colin Hannon
forum member

Sustain - Helena Partnerships

Send message

Total Posts: 22

Joined: 29 July 2015

Hi Nicola , yes I agree it’s become demoralising seeing people tripped up day after day , our nearest PIP assessment centre always states in the HCP report claimant was able to mobilise to the assessment room which is 25 metres .

Unless they can fly or levitate the claimant has no option other than to request they bring the assessment room nearer to the entrance to the building ? I doubt this would happen , and surprise surprise no mention of the claimant walking in pain or discomfort or never walked in a timely manner or the claimant stopped to abate their pain .

These HCP should be forced to give evidence at tribunal and subject to the same grilling the appellant gets

 

Wensleyfoss
forum member

Welfare Rights Advisor, Autism Anglia

Send message

Total Posts: 61

Joined: 10 June 2015

I requested that the DWP at MR, measure the assessment waiting room. Either they couldn’t be bothered or realised they were on sticky ground. The report stated ‘x walked 60 metres to the assessment room.’  I know for a fact, it isn’t anymore than 35 metres, but claimant received points.
I am on a mission with DWP policy, to change the assessment process for individuals with autism, stroke, dementia etc.. The times I see ‘showed no cognitive impairment.’ It makes a mockery of the whole diagnostic process and the strict criteria qualified professionals use when diagnosing an individual.

gw
forum member

Glasgow West Housing Association

Send message

Total Posts: 285

Joined: 24 June 2010

my client has lost his DLA car are he “walked at a slow pace with 2 crutches, 10 points because he can walk more than 20metres but no more than 50 metres..

no physical problems with public transport..

was awarded standard for daily living as he received 9 points.. was there not mention of standard living allowing a Motability car at one point?

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

Nicola M - 08 February 2017 09:44 PM

we have decided you can stand and then move more than 50 metres but no more than 200 metres, either aided or
unaided”

When he visits said supermarket with his wife, he sits on a bench or in the car or in the cafe and waits for her, not jogging around the place with wild abandon. Which of course he tried to explain at his f2f but fell on deaf ears.

No mobility award. From a HR M DLA who have had to return their motability car and is now stuck in his home as he can’t walk, can’t use public transport and can’t afford to replace the car.

So fed up with seeing decisions like this day in day out.

Have you asked for SoR/RoP to look at appeal to UT Nicola?

past caring
forum member

Welfare Rights Adviser - Southwark Law Centre, Peckham

Send message

Total Posts: 1116

Joined: 25 February 2014

The way I’m reading this it isn’t a FtT decision but a DWP decision being quoted from Paul…..

Anyway, agree with the o/p (assuming I’m right about the source) -

“You said you have difficulties with planning and following journeys. It is noted that you drive a
car which requires the ability to plan and follow the route of a journey.” is the explanation of a decision based on the following from the face-to-face consultation - “Commuting:- Drives a manual car for appointments or for shopping.”

Client does not have a driving licence, does not own a car and car ownership driving was not discussed in the consultation. Far from being the only example of this kind of thing…..

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

past caring - 21 March 2017 02:32 PM

The way I’m reading this it isn’t a FtT decision but a DWP decision being quoted from Paul..

Ah, I was jumping the gun there somewhat, you’re probably right. MR and appeal then.

Nicola M
forum member

Age UK I&A Calderdale & Kirklees

Send message

Total Posts: 3

Joined: 13 November 2016

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK - 21 March 2017 04:19 PM
past caring - 21 March 2017 02:32 PM

The way I’m reading this it isn’t a FtT decision but a DWP decision being quoted from Paul..

Ah, I was jumping the gun there somewhat, you’re probably right. MR and appeal then.

Yes - it is a direct quote from the decision. Currently waiting since Nov for reply to MR!

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

Nicola M - 21 March 2017 10:36 PM

Yes - it is a direct quote from the decision. Currently waiting since Nov for reply to MR!

That’s ridiculous - I’ve sent you a copy of the DWP escalation numbers, I’d give them a call to chase the decision (which almost inevitably will simplhy rubber stamp the original anyway).

Good luck and if there’s anything we can do to help, give me a shout.