Supersession question

my client has been awarded PIP,  standard rate of daily living activities only. I was going to submit a possible mandatory reconsideration, but having received the original form which was completed by another agency , it will be difficult to argue. However, the client has now gone into hospital, and I have been told by his friend that he has got much worse. I want to now request a supersession , but I a m not sure how long he will be in hospital, and obtaining further medical evidence from the hospital may take some time. shall I put in a supersession request anyway now? His original PIP decision was made on the 25th March so I am aware of time scales, although I think I have 3 months? Should I wait until client is out of hospital, or send in a letter now?

Are you saying that there are three months to request reconsideration?

You can prompt a review at any time if there has been a change in the condition. As you know, the process will take some time so the backwards time test will probably be met by the time a decision is made.

Make sure DWP is aware he’s in hospital as this is relevant to payment of PIP.

..And without wanting to come over all ‘grandmother sucking eggs’ do make sure your client is aware of the potential risk of rocking the boat in terms of his current award. I’m sure you have, but just in case…

As an aside, I have recently requested a supersession for a PIP claimant. At the time of reporting change of circs they advised a PIP2 would be issued that day.

When PIP2 had not arrived 2 weeks later I phoned up to be told no PIP2 form had been issued and is unlikely to be issued for a further 4-8 weeks. Telephone operator advised this is because they are prioritising new claims. So be prepared for delays and to put up a bit of a fight!

I can’t understand the logic or intent behind this. Any suggestions?

Tbidmead - I guess they are just trying to meet the target for reducing times taken to process claims and the target only applies to new claims. With the small sample I deal with new claim - decision times have fallen quite a bit, from about 9 months on average for the last year or so to maybe 5-6 months now. I did see a couple that went through very quickly without assessment, 8 days one of them.

No doubt after the election there will be some new targets and the delays will be shifted around the system somewhere else.

Kate - you could always do MR of original decision and a supersession too. Re. the MR, you’ve got til the end of the week to get it in if you haven’t already.

I don’t see why it’s such an administrative hurdle to generate a form. It is populated with personal data, but I assume it’s done automatically. I don’t know whether printing off the specimen version available online marked “not for use” would be fired back?

Do you think I can put the MR and supersession together? I did not do the PIP form with the client and I want to state that having inherited the case and discussed with him he was not well enough to answer the questions fully at the time the PIP 2 was completed. But I am aware that in any MR they will only look at what has been put on that form. Thinking about it, until I have more information about client’s health and discharge from the hospital when I can then do the supersession, I may not do the MR at all! OR does anyone think I should put one in anyway?

You could always request a late MR if it appears to be appropriate after client leaves hospital/you’re able to obtain further info from him. It’s a risk admittedly, but so far at least we’ve not had any difficulty with the DWP refusing to accept late PIP MR requests. It does sound as if you need more info from him/those involved in his care before you can make an informed decision on how (or whether) to proceed.

We’ve produced some information on pursuing MR’s, including late requests here Pursuing a Mandatory Reconsideration

As well as establishing grounds for the MR (and evidence isn’t always a priority if you’re late in the first instance), it’s worthwhile reminding your client that applications for an award to be looked at again (whether by supersession or MR) always carry a risk of reduction or removal of existing award.