Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
New copy and paste phrase
I am sure we are all aware with “there is no specialist input” and other phrases bandied about in PIP decision notices, but I have recently noticed a new one cropping up: “no sounds of pain and discomfort were heard”. This refers to telephone assessments.
I have seen it few times and in one letter I have seen it included twice.
I mean….Christ, I have no words actually.
Do they WANT clients bawling and groaning on the phone? How about letting people to keep SOME dignity in this stressful situation.
Of course this PROVES that client experiences no pain, in case you were wondering. Coupled with no specialist input.
I recently had a report that said client did not ” sound tired” and did not “sound breathless” during a telephone assessment.
I pointed out the obvious i.e that the client was sitting and not washing/dressing or any other activity we claimed made him breathless and they did have the decency to agree in the MRN that they could not determine this over the phone although did not change the decision…waiting for appeal
I spent the best part of 18 months on painkillers 24/7 which, for me, is something I would go out of my way to avoid. Even at its worst, when the pain was probably an 8 out of 10, I could apparently be heard in work making the odd wincing noise and catching my breath. A friend who works in surgery has often pointed out to me that humans express noises associated with pain when they experience a sudden trauma and even that may be mitigated with shock. Humans with chronic pain very rarely express that verbally or through noises.
That said, I don’t think the phrase in question is new. It’s just a resurgence of something which comes up periodically like all of their recycled nonsense.
I recently countered this with
“15 The HCP reports (p209 of the bundle) that “no signs of pain or breathlessness” were observed but I am reminded that the then Mrs Commissioner Heggs noted in CM/166/1998 that “pain can be born in stoic silence” (paragraph 3)”
“no emotions were heard during telephone assessment” [sic]
A phrase that has stuck in my head since reading it ....
I’m just looking at a telephone assessment report that has the ‘no audible sounds of pain heard during assessment’ phrase.
It also includes a new one - ‘IO shows he has full functional range in his right shoulder’.
How did she manage to observe that over a phone line?
Making an assumption that client was holding the phone up to their ear?
I’m just looking at a telephone assessment report that has the ‘no audible sounds of pain heard during assessment’ phrase.
It also includes a new one - ‘IO shows he has full functional range in his right shoulder’.
How did she manage to observe that over a phone line?
Perhaps the latter was based on the assumption that all modern phones are held between neck and ear without the use of hands :)
Hi guys
There was a list of “trigger phrases” prepared by someone here on RN. I’ve lost the link. Anyone’s got it?
Bigger picture: if we encounter them, is it worth at all addressing them? I mean some of them are surely by now well know to the Tribunal and are not worth anyone’s time.
I tend to address entitlement rather than the HCP report or a DM adopting its simplistic reasoning.
I focus on the HCP report to the extent of highlighting 2 or 3 pieces of irrefutable idiocy and then just leave it there. That’s probably the only place I address stock phrases.
Recent examples include ““… Sensory impairments are not considered in the scope for mixing with people and making budgeting decisions”
followed by my highlighting one of HCP guidance examples for mixing with people which, er, is focused on sensory impairment.
Similarly, “Claimant attended appointment unattended.”
followed by my response that
Trying to use the fact the appellant attended a telephone assessment unaccompanied is nothing if not comedic. They are sight impaired and would need no prompting or social support from another during a telephone conversation once the conversation had started provided they were in a quiet environment and their hearing loss did not impact. Given that the activity in question is quite explicitly about face to face social engagement it is impossible to see how the HCP could infer anything from a telephone conversation about the impact of sight loss on social engagement. The fact of sight registration and a clear description of the loss of the central visual field has simply been disregarded.
God love ‘em.
Talking of Stock phrases ‘has no medication or input for mental health’.
HP guidance the PIP assessment guide part 1: the assessment process – Informal observations states the following https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-assessment-guide-for-assessment-providers/pip-assessment-guide-part-1-the-assessment-process held that - :
‘1.6.36 when considering mental health medication HPs should remember that not all claimants with a mental health condition will be on medication or receiving therapy. Severity of a mental health condition does not necessarily correspond with the type or dosage of medication that the claimant is receiving. There are a number of reasons why a claimant may be unable or choose not to take mental health medication, for example, but not limited to:
poor compliance due to the nature of mental health condition
side effects or difficulty tolerating medication
lack of efficacy
preference for psychological therapy instead of medication
complicating factors, for example excessive alcohol consumption
Therefore absence of medication does not automatically mean that the health condition is not severe. However, HPs should consider the type and context of certain medications, for example use of depot antipsychotic injections in psychotic disorders.
HPs should also take into account that some medications are used to treat different conditions, for example some antidepressants are also licenced to treat anxiety. HPs must also consider the use of other treatments such as psychological therapies’.
Useful thread at https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/17167.
I always ally that decision to guidance you quote.
Also see https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/welfare-rights/caselaw/item/Tribunals-explanation-for-rejecting-GPs-evidence-on-basis-that-it-just-re and https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/welfare-rights/caselaw/item/Evidence-need-not-be-medical-to-challenge-a-health-care-professionals-repo
Try getting a decent PIP medical assessment these days if you drive a manual car…
Useful thread at https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/17167.
I always ally that decision to guidance you quote.
Also see https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/welfare-rights/caselaw/item/Tribunals-explanation-for-rejecting-GPs-evidence-on-basis-that-it-just-re and https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/welfare-rights/caselaw/item/Evidence-need-not-be-medical-to-challenge-a-health-care-professionals-repo
Me too Mike. Great work by Peter formerly of OWR..
Commiserations re: Wrexham etc etc.
Ta thanks!
Blimey, not sure how Wrexham sneaked in there but thanks. Tremendous season as far as I was concerned. Start of the journey etc. If it was as simple as having money then Everton would be top 4 etc.
Hi all, thank you for this excellent thread ... seeing this in NI also ... Can I ask, has / is anyone challenging the use of ‘no audible signs of ...’ to Commissioner to get a definitive view on Assessment Providers / Decision Makers relying on this to deprive people of benefit. Best to all, Kevin