Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
Not Allowed to Move Around - Case Law?
Hi Everyone,
I have received an interesting query from a colleague and was just wondering whether anyone has previous experience with this and/or knows of any relevant case law relating to this.
We don’t think there should be any issue in respect of the mobility component being awarded as there are other health conditions that satisfy the descriptors but just intrigued as to whether anyone has come across the restrictions imposed on moving around before.
Thank you in advance.
‘Hey I’d like to ask a PIP question as I am intrigued to hear your thoughts as to how this will be treated. In regards to the mobility section, I’m supporting a dad to complete the form for his daughter who is currently admitted in hospital. His daughter has several health conditions, one of them being severe anorexia which is the reason she is admitted. She is sectioned so is not allowed to walk or exercise, how do we think this will be treated for the mobility component? She can walk and enjoys walking because she wants to exercise as much as possible due to her condition, but is not physically allowed to and has to be driven everywhere when on home leave. She will walk a bit, for example to her room but even if she is weak and tired she will push herself because of the exercise. She has no regard to her safety in this sense.’
I don’t think the “not allowed” bit is really the point. She gets points because she is unable to walk even shorter distances without becoming “weak and tired” and apparently creating a risk to her safety so she can’t perform the activity “reliably” in the sense of reg 4(2A) - the activity is still ‘unsafe’ if it endangers her safety even if she is not weighing the risks accurately. The doctors who are advising her not to move around are presumably doing so for these same health based reasons. But its the health issues that matter, rather than what she is or is not allowed to do.
If she were “not allowed” to move around for some non-health related reason, this wouldn’t be considered. It’s an assessment of what your health stops you doing. It’s similar to a case where someone says that they don’t actually do any cooking themselves but we still have to look at what they would be able to do.
Thanks Elliot - we were thinking along these lines but just wondered if anyone had ever encountered someone who is ‘not allowed’ to move around and how this would be interpreted but as you say health related and so a ‘ban’ on this really makes no difference.
Agree with Elliot but also don’t forget the backwards and forwards qualifying periods of 3/9 months, would the restrictions on her movement likely last that long?
I recall there was some case law for DLA that said someone could qualify for the higher rate mobility component if they had received medical advice not to walk, eg because of severe anorexia.
For those not familiar with DLA - you could/can only qualify for the higher rate mobility component on the basis of a physical health condition, so this case law was key.
I think perhaps you are thinking of CDLA/1525/2008:
https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/welfare-rights/caselaw/item/Mobility-component-whether-anorexia-nervosa-constitutes-a-physical-disablem