PIP regulations to be amended

shawn - 28 February 2017 10:18 AM

Everything’s okay ..... it’s not a cut apparently according to the BBC’s new ‘reality check’ service:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39106548

whilst thats technically correct what it is is also very concerning.

this is another example of the government not liking the decisions made in a court/tribunal so just amending the rules or ignoring the decision to suit themselves.

whats the point in the judicial process?

as i seen pointed out elsewhere, they have moved rapidly on this yet continue to ignore decisions like the supreme court bedroom tax one.

I’m far from convinced that the SSAC exemption properly applies here. They’re trying to spin this whole ‘shock, unexpected’ narrative over something that has been there from the start, and was not controversial until they changed their own guidelines in 2014 to redefine ‘following’ as navigating, but without changing the regulations. That patch was bound to come off sooner or later.

Stating the annoyingly obvious regarding “bizarre tribunal decisions” etc etc etc DWP agreed etc etc

HL v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP) [2015] UKUT 0694 (AAC) that ‘Her fall-back case is that “overwhelming psychological distress”  should not be confined to 1b and 1e where it is expressly mentioned, but is capable of being relevant to a person’s ability to “follow the route”.  As noted at [7c], this point is acceded by the Secretary of State and I agree.  The question always, though, is whether the ability to “follow the route” in the sense outlined above is impaired by a claimant’s physical or mental condition’.

Here’s a link to today’s Urgent Question and the Secretary of State’s response:

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/dbf6cdf9-bcab-4552-9ef0-215cc37f1ba5?in=13:08:09

Hi,

Would anyone have a copy of the 2014 PIP guidance before the change and after the to redefine ‘following’ as navigating?

This is to see if we might pursue the SSAC issue that Mr. Finch has raised.

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

shawn - 28 February 2017 01:59 PM

Here’s a link to today’s Urgent Question and the Secretary of State’s response:

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/dbf6cdf9-bcab-4552-9ef0-215cc37f1ba5?in=13:08:09

That’s an hour I will never get back!

I only have an extract from the 2013 guidance, covering the specific activities, but it does contain the line about using public transport, which was reassuring to a lot of people at the time. It’s more telling for what it doesn’t say (anything about a difference between navigating and other difficulties, or why there was a departure from the lower mobility in DLA which was really very similar wording to 11d).

The 2014 update is so exaggerated in what it demands without a proper basis (particularly for 11b and 11e), that it seems like overcompensation.

In Sumpter (JR on 20 metre rule), the DWP successfully argued that the rule was justified because they had moved resources from physical disabilities to other kinds. H rate mobility was already there for blindness and dangerous behaviour in DLA, so what else did they have in mind? (And the most anyone is asking for now is that the lower rate is preserved for help going out, not increased. I think MH held that 11e is the limit and so 11f is still unavailable for distress.)

Also as Billy pointed out, the consultation response was clear that needing someone with you scores.

Attached an Research briefing from the commons has lots of links may be of use?

Draft Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013
Standard Note:
Last updated:
28 January 2013
Author:
Steven Kennedy
Section
Social Policy Section
Personal

I asked my contact at Atos yesterday, about the Improvement Plan. I also wanted some info on the audio recording trial that the Sec of State mentioned yesterday. I really didn’t get an answer back, just that audio assessments are available at all AC’s as long as the person has followed the process. It’s like wading through a treacle swamp in fog!

Damn . .  I’ve not long finished reading the updated PIP Assessment Guide from September :(

Here’s a copy of the May 2014 HP PIP asssessment guidance just in case?

I am using Sept 2016 edition: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/547146/pip-assessment-guide.pdf

edit; I take it back! 2013 PIP assessment guide.

consultation response is here

I have read that the changes come into force only for NEW CLAIMS made from 16 March but can find no reference. Is this correct and why?

Sue

sue c - 01 March 2017 11:57 AM

I have read that the changes come into force only for NEW CLAIMS made from 16 March but can find no reference. Is this correct and why?

Sue

New regs say “Coming into force 16th March 2017” but as far as I can see, it will affect new and repeat claims from that point if implemented. Current claimants won’t be affected until reassessment so maybe that’s where confusion comes from?