× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Disability benefits  →  Thread

DLA - PIP transfer 2 years ago now Special Rules

juliem
forum member

Macmillan welfare rights advisor - Barnsley MBC, Barnsley

Send message

Total Posts: 124

Joined: 17 June 2010

Hello all,

Client was born 14/10/1949.. Was on DLA low rate mobility and middle rate care prior to transfer to PIP two years ago.
On transfer was awarded SR Daily Living Allowance but no Mobility element. 

Client has now been diagnosed with cancer and DS1500 issued. Has been awarded ER Daily Living and no Mobility. Not happy as thinks eligible for Mobility as Special Rules.

My thoughts are that it is now not possible to get any mobility, as it was not awarded 2 years ago and not disputed at that time, and client is well over 65 now. 

I can’t remember having met this exact situation since PIP started! I have read CPAG p 614 - 619 and can’t see anything that answers this particular question, but it might just be me.

So can somebody answer it for me please?

Thanks in advance.

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3128

Joined: 14 July 2014

Special rules doesn’t make any difference to this.

The received wisdom is that you can’t get a mobility award for the first time on the basis of a change occurring after pension age / 65. See CPAG p. 756

I have set out elsewhere here my doubts as to whether the received wisdom is actually correct. There does not seem to be anything in the Regulations which would prevent it being awarded.

https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/14510/

Stainsby
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Plumstead Community Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 615

Joined: 17 June 2010

The case on that thread is before the UT again.  This time she is represented and we have been given leave.  I am waiting for the SOS observations but will post as and when

Ianb
forum member

Macmillan benefits team, Citizens Advice Bristol

Send message

Total Posts: 958

Joined: 24 November 2017

juliem - 13 March 2020 12:44 PM

Not happy as thinks eligible for Mobility as Special Rules.

Even below pension age Special Rules guarantees Enhanced Rate of Daily Living but the Mobility element remains subject to assessment and is not guaranteed (although in my experience it is normally awarded at the Enhanced rate).

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3128

Joined: 14 July 2014

Stainsby - 13 March 2020 01:56 PM

The case on that thread is before the UT again.  This time she is represented and we have been given leave.  I am waiting for the SOS observations but will post as and when

That’s interesting - is it in respect of the issue about the regulations or the merits?

Stainsby
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Plumstead Community Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 615

Joined: 17 June 2010

The issue is how the transitional regulations are to be interpreted

juliem
forum member

Macmillan welfare rights advisor - Barnsley MBC, Barnsley

Send message

Total Posts: 124

Joined: 17 June 2010

Thanks. Would it be a normal MR application?
From the reading of CPAG I think they might be stumped as entitlement to DLA mobility did end over a year ago but they can give it a go.

Stainsby
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Plumstead Community Law Centre

Send message

Total Posts: 615

Joined: 17 June 2010

I think that if you missed the 13 month deadline there is nothing much you can do unless Elliot is proved correct and Regulation 27(1) provides an unrestricted means to supersede in these circumstances

My client lost before the UT first time around but then made a new ” claim” for the mobility component within a year of her DLA ending.  (The purported claim is really an application for supersession)

I argued before the FtT that

It is arguable that (Transitional Provision) Regulation 27(3) applies in my client’s case because she was entitled to DLA less than 12 months prior to her making a fresh claim for PIP in October 2017,  notwithstanding that the fresh claim will take effect as a supersession on account of the fact that my client had been awarded the daily living component of PIP (R(IB)2/04 at [146])

The FtT rejected that argument but it is now before the UT

[ Edited: 16 Mar 2020 at 05:04 pm by Stainsby ]
Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3128

Joined: 14 July 2014

juliem - 16 March 2020 08:50 AM

Thanks. Would it be a normal MR application?
From the reading of CPAG I think they might be stumped as entitlement to DLA mobility did end over a year ago but they can give it a go.

You can ask for a mandatory reconsideration of the supersession which took him from SR/- to ER/-.

The DWP will argue that it is impossible for mobility to be awarded for the first time post 65.

The argument in response is - cite your authority. If you read the PIP Regulations, nothing prevents this from being done.

It was always a rule in DLA, and presumably it was the intention in PIP, but it seems like the drafters forgot to include this provision.