Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
PIP Applications for Prisoners & 3 Month Rule
I have tried to research this but there’s not much in the Welfare Reform Act and I am confused with the Regs. I understand that an applicant/client must have the relevant illness/disability for 3 months and a future 9 months to be eligible for a PIP award. Can a serving prisoner due for release count his/her last 3 months of detention towards the 3 month requirement ie make a PIP claim 3 months prior to release just in order to speed the application up. Secondly can some other expert also advise me whether there are different rules for remand prisoners ie in custody but not convicted. Many thanks.
Morning,
There are two concepts at play which are entitlement and payability. You are entitled to the benefit if you meet the points system etc but the benefit may not be payable if you are in custody, hospital etc. The idea is, I suppose, that they don’t want to have to close the claim down and re-assess you every time you leave hospital/prison - instead you preserve an ‘underlying entitlement’ whilst you are treated/detained which then comes back into play when you leave.
Being in prison doesn’t seem to have any bearing on the entitlement side of things, so it could count towards the 3 months - but nothing would actually be paid until they left prison.
As far as remand goes, s87 of the Act seems to suggest that anyone in legal custody is covered. That would seem to include remand centres. The important factor seems to be that the custody itself is lawful - not how you actually got there.
ADM Chapter P4 may assist - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/534762/admp4.pdf
My reading insofar of the 3-month backward looking period is yes they could do what you suggest.
The section relevant to prisoners and PIP states:
Except to the extent that regulations provide otherwise, no amount in respect of personal independence payment is payable in respect of a person for a period during which the person is undergoing imprisonment or detention in legal custody.
So it’s payability that is primarily affected rather than entitlement. Looking at the PIP regs, it’s regulation 31 that deals with prisoners:
Prisoners and detainees
31.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), section 87 of the Act (prisoners and detainees) does not apply in respect of the first 28 days of any period during which C is a person to whom that section would otherwise apply.
(2) Where, on the day on which C’s entitlement to personal independence payment commences, C is a person to whom that section applies, paragraph (1) does not apply to C in respect of any period of consecutive days, beginning with that day, on which C continues to be a person to whom that section applies.
(3) Section 87 of the Act does not apply to C in respect of any period after the conclusion of criminal proceedings as a result of which C is detained in a hospital or similar institution in Great Britain as a person suffering from mental disorder unless C satisfies either of the conditions set out in paragraph (4).
(4) The conditions referred to in paragraph (3) are —
(a)C is -
(i)detained under section 45A of the Mental Health Act 1983(1) (power of higher courts to direct hospital admission) or section 47(2) of that Act (removal to hospital of persons serving sentences of imprisonment, etc); and
(ii)being detained on or before the day which the Secretary of State has certified to be C’s release date within the meaning of section 50(3) of that Act(3); or
(b)C is being detained under-
(i)section 59A of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995(4) (hospital direction); or
(ii)section 136 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003(5) (transfer of prisoners for treatment of mental disorder).
(5) For the purposes of this regulation —
(a)“hospital or similar institution” means any place (not being a prison, a detention centre, a young offenders institution or remand centre and not being at or in any such place) in which persons suffering from mental disorder are or may be received for care or treatment;
(b)criminal proceedings against any person are deemed to be concluded upon that person being found insane in those proceedings with the effect that that person cannot be tried or the trial of that person cannot proceed.
(6) Section 87 of the Act does not apply to C where —
(a)C is undergoing imprisonment or detention in legal custody outside Great Britain; and
(b)in similar circumstances in Great Britain, C would have been excepted from the application of that section by virtue of the operation of any provision of this regulation.
This states that PIP can continue to be paid for the first 28 days that someone is in custody (para.1), except where entitlement to PIP comes about where they are already in custody in which case no payments are made (as per sec.87) (para.2) and the remaining para’s deal with people on MH sections and similar. There aren’t any interpretation regs relevant here and so, my reading is that for people on remand, the rules are the same as for convicted prisoners.
Many thanks to you both for your valued input. So am I right in believing that a client prisoner could submit his/her PIP1 three (3) months prior to release and then after a medical after release if an award is made it would be backdated and payment put into place from date of release!
Many thanks to you both for your valued input. So am I right in believing that a client prisoner could submit his/her PIP1 three (3) months prior to release and then after a medical after release if an award is made it would be backdated and payment put into place from date of release!
Yes - equally I think he could put the claim in 3 years before his release in an appropriate case and be paid from the date of release.
I don’t know what arrangements there are for carrying out PIP medicals in prisons - possibly the DWP just put the claim on ice until release - but I imagine that having an entitlement to PIP could end up being useful evidence if a prisoner is trying to have his security level changed or something of the sort.
In theory, yes. As I’m sure you’re aware, what happens in practice could be more challenging but be interesting to hear how your client gets on.
So the only benefit of an early PIP claim for such a client would hopefully result that their medical could be (or requested) if luck would have it as soon as they are released to quicken up the claim or I wonder that if the DWP or Medical Assessor refuse to carry out a medical prior to release ie in a prison, would there be any HRA issues around this or breaches of the Equality Act etc.