Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
Numbers offered access to new PIP online claims process
Extract from an email from a mate who works for a mental health charity in upcountry ‘I’m concerned that it says do not ask your GP or medical professional for additional info as they may charge you for this’
We have reservations about the need for a password and process involving text and email facilities.
Our aspirations for the online form was that it could help with clients who find it a challenge to engage i.e. an impromptu drop in turning into an application for PIP e.g. itinerant homeless clients with out a phone or an email address.
You could argue either way on that first point. So many people delay submitting the PIP 2 awaiting GP or other evidence which talks to diagnosis, meds, treatment and prognosis but next to nothing useful about reliably performing 12 activities.
Just come out of the DWP reasonable adjustments forum. Take-up of the ePIP2 is running at 28%. No acceptance that this might be down to lack of call responder knowledge, despite some evidence of both a lack of knowledge that the process is now fully live, and, active resistance in other cases. Others present reported something I’m aware of i.e. requested paper PIP2s have suddenly started to not arrive with claimants in greater numbers than we’ve ever seen.
PIP will also be hosting the first email as a reasonable adjustment trial imminently.
True Mike re first point - I was thinking of e.g. CMHT reports, Consultant reports, Psychologist reports re: autism spectrum some of which contents may have some bearing on some of the 12 activities.
Absolutely regarding the following ‘diagnosis, meds, treatment and prognosis but next to nothing useful about reliably performing 12 activities’. But where I would diverge (albeit out of desperation rather than disagreement) is, such are the quality of a lot of the PA4 reports we are seeing.
Even scraps of info to semi focus minds (albeit forlorn or otherwise) e.g. clients with learning disabilities, client’s with leg ulcers, client’s with mental health issues and so on and so forth. There is also the rare, I say rare, I’m actually exaggerating because I haven’t seen an example for a few years of ATOS actually writing or phoning a GP, Consultant, CPN, OT etc.
DWP reasonable adjustments forum? Was this a regional meeting? I ask because I am really interested, we could do with similar events down here and not just confined to PIP.
Yeah I wouldn’t argue with you on those. My very general principle is that medical reports where the person has a health condition which possibly includes a lack of insight are very useful. The other stuff? Varies.
Totally agree re: PA4s but my method has always been to take them out of the equation. Our view of HCP reports is largely shared by tribunals (with some dishonorable exceptions) so you’re kicking at an open door. Easy enough to find 30+ errors in any PA4 but arguably a poor use of time. I tend to find 2 or 3 which are irrefutable and then move onto ensuring that the strengths of the claimants evidence win the day.
The DWP RAF is a national thing. There is already some CitA involvement and multiple people from DPOs and LA WRs. Often more remarkable for the people who don’t turn up but increasingly useful.
Yeah I wouldn’t argue with you on those. My very general principle is that medical reports where the person has a health condition which possibly includes a lack of insight are very useful. The other stuff? Varies.
Totally agree re: PA4s but my method has always been to take them out of the equation. Our view of HCP reports is largely shared by tribunals (with some dishonorable exceptions) so you’re kicking at an open door. Easy enough to find 30+ errors in any PA4 but arguably a poor use of time. I tend to find 2 or 3 which are irrefutable and then move onto ensuring that the strengths of the claimants evidence win the day.
The DWP RAF is a national thing. There is already some CitA involvement and multiple people from DPOs and LA WRs. Often more remarkable for the people who don’t turn up but increasingly useful.
‘The DWP RAF is a national thing. There is already some CitA involvement and multiple people from DPOs and LA WRs. Often more remarkable for the people who don’t turn up but increasingly useful’.
Mike we’re in deepest Dorset and down here, well erm nothing.
Would you be able to share any info please , so we can go further with the above.
Happily. Have just DM’d you.
Happily. Have just DM’d you.
Thanks Mike!!!!!!!!!! Really helpful!!!!!!!!
Late to the party as usual- has anyone had any difficulties getting the link to work, a colleague has told me that the claimant has sent the link to her but it wont open?
I went to a DWP stakeholder meeting last week about the new ‘Apply for PIP’ (currently just in private Beta stage) which, unlike the ePIP2 which we talk about earlier in this thread, is full online from start to finish so a few notes below -
Originally called ‘Get your PIP’ but now changed to ‘Apply for PIP’ - didn’t want to raise expectations!
Currently been going 44 days and 434 claims have been made using it
Apply for PIP process - accessed via link in email in trial but will be on gov.uk once fully live
• Need to provide email, Nino and phone number, DOB - must link in to what DWP have on record - but can ring if any problems
• Get sent security code to phone/email
• Create password - now have account can come back to at any point
• Saves each time moves to new screen
PIP1
• Do you need help to fill in or communicate?
• Is someone helping you with the claim (if these two don’t match, raises a flag
• Name, Nino, DOB, address etc (ask if ok to write to address and space to put alternative address if needed), phone
• Do you want text messages, communications in another format (eg sign, braille, audio, paper)?
• Nationality questions, residence and presence questions
• Enter conditions (consumer research said people wanted to add at this point - currently technicalities only allow one but aim is for to be able to add more than one - work in progress)
• Consent to contact health and care professionals etc
• Details of health and care professionals - as many as you want (changed ‘when did you last see them’ to ‘when did you last speak to them’)
• Payability questions - hospital, care homes etc
• Asked to check answers - currently have to use back button but aim is to have edit link so can go straight there
PIP2 process - same as current digital PIP2
DWP aim to expand to a ‘public Beta’ stage at some point - they are interested to know whether stakeholders think they should aim to do this sooner with a limited claimant groups or should they perfect it more and then roll out to a much wider group. Any thoughts welcome and I will feed back.
One query I had on the system is that in the PIP1 it would tell you if you failed, for example, a residence condition. I was concerned that this might then put someone off completing the claim without getting a decision when it could be that they had just input info incorrectly. DWP said they are doing more consumer research on this.
A couple of things to add to the above. This was also spoken about at the recent Reasonable Adjustments Forum. The offer of a digital process goes to 10 people per day, which clearly explains the above number. There are no exact dates but it’s expected to remain in private beta to around Autumn when it will either go public or a decision will be made that they need longer to develop background systems. There are some fairly robust seeming processes in place around chasing people quickly of the PIP1 isn’t returned within a couple of days.
To add further to the 434 figure above. They offered 1,817. 24% accepted. 33% declined. 43% ineligible. Ineligible = if they’ve not got a mobile or email.
Largest reasons for declining. 25% didn’t feel digitally confident. 24% prefer paper. 13% not digitally literate. 11% declined for accessibility reasons.
I am heartened in a way to see that last figure. 11% is a significant figure in terms of access issues. Accessibility is always presented as a kind of “dealing with the 1%” way so solid evidence that more than 1 in 10 nevertheless have difficulties with a purely digital process will hopefully raise a few eyebrows.
A couple of concerns:
1 - If you opt for paper after opting for digital then the 30 days to return restart from when you opt for digital. I could not get clarity on the date of claim for a person who opts for digital then reverts. It ought to be the date of the original conversation but DWP were unable to confirm that was the case, which is a concern.
2 - Daphne has confirmed a suspicion of mine. Where has the DLA evidence question gone from the PIP 1?
Historically this was always part of the telephone script with the dishonourable exception of the private company who revealed that they had, as best I recall, “forgotten” to ask said question for some period of months.
So, why is it no longer part of the PIP 1 script and how long has this been the case?