Planning and following journey descriptor

Cl is 68 has learning disabilities and cannot read and understand letters relying on others to do this and explain them to him. His PIP questionnaire was completed on his behalf by Age UK. The questionnaire doesn’t mention his learning disabilities directly although they appear incidentally in some of the answers. Medical conditions have been missed off although the prescription drugs clearly indicate that cl has eg heart condition and epilepsy. 
Cl has had both hips replaced more than 30 years ago. He now has severe arthritis and uses two crutches at home or supports himself on furniture. He cannot use public transport and has a Motability scooter which he parks right outside his back door. This is his lifeline and without it he would be housebound and unable to shop. He lives alone and struggles with basic issues: personal hygiene, finances (he’s a longstanding debt client).
From DLA h/r mobility and m/r care cl has now been given 6 points for DL and 4 for M. Cl’s budgeting ability is so poor that he would not be able to manage to buy or maintain a scooter - this is one aspect of his life where up to now he has not been required to do anything thanks to Motability.
On the form the 20-50 m box was ticked on cl’s behalf. The HCP stated he could walk 50-200m hence the 4 points. The reason given was that MSO “shows no restrictions” (although his poor gait and slow speed were also noted) “and he is not taking pain relief medication which suggests he can walk more than 50m reliably.” I think I can challenge this and hopefully get 10 points. I’ll also argue cl doesn’t understand distances and realistically can only manage 1-20m. However I recognise that given his age and DWP’s determination to get such people off Mobility and into AA this last point may be hard to achieve. So I’ve looked at Planning and following journey. Q.13b on the questionnaire has BOTH Yes and No boxes ticked while 13c has Sometimes ticked. Cl in fact doesn’t go anywhere he doesn’t know: he uses the scooter for shopping and the doctor but that’s it. However whether he makes such journeys seems to me not the issue: if he would require help then he should score. I think the Age UK person (who after all isn’t used to Mobility) possibly took the view that as he doesn’t travel to unknown destinations this descriptor wasn’t relevant. But I think I can still raise it even if we haven’t done so in the MR request or the SSCS1. Any advice? Incidentally the assessment lasted 15 minutes and neither a physical nor mental health exam was made.

When I am bring up issues that haven’t been discussed previously in MR or SSCS1 in tribunal, I am always asked why. My response is that after going through the bundle in detail these issues became apparent.
It is still relevant to the case and def worth a try in the hearing.

A tribunal is a complete rehearing. Shouldn’t be an issue. Certainly can’t see an issue with 1 to 20m.

Maybe worth adding in some references to their own assessment guidance e.g. the stuff about not taking a snapshot etc.