The descriptors in Planning and following journeys

I know this has been raised before but I think that there is a lot of difficulty with the criteria in the PIP section on mobility, when we are dealing with clients who would previously have fallen into L R Mobility because they need another person with them on an unfamiliar journey.  It we look at descriptors 1 (b), 1(d),  and 1(e ):

1(b) “Needs prompting to be able to undertake any journey to avoid overwhelming psychological distress to the claimant (4)”  The clients I have mentioned will easily meet this descriptor and get 4 points, but this is no good at all unless they also can add on some points from Activity 2, to do with physical difficulties in moving. 

1(d)  “Cannot follow the route of an unfamiliar journey without another person, assistance dog or orientation aid (10)”  -  clients are not being awarded this unless they cannot actually navigate from A to B.  Being unable psychologically to go out without support isn’t there.  So, unless the person’s psychological condition is such that, if they set out on their own they would actually become disorientated or get lost, they will not be awarded this. They are likely just to get the 4 points for 1(b) – “needs prompting” and will be of no help at all unless they are also awarded points in the “Moving Around” section

1(e )  “Cannot undertake any journey because it would cause overwhelming distress to the claimant (10) It seems that they will not be awarded this if they can venture out of the house at all.”  However,  the regs state that to be considered able to do something you need to do it “safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and in a reasonable time period”  They also say that if one descriptor is satisfied on over half the days of the period, that descriptor will apply.  Therefore, despite the use of “any journey” could this descriptor apply to someone who has good and bad days and cannot go out on 50% of the time?

  However, there are many people who can cope with a short familiar journey most of the time - , to local shop, GP, pick up children etc, and it seems to me that then this descriptor will not apply

So we have a group of people who are so distressed that they cannot undertake an unfamiliar journey without help, who seem to be left with 1(d) and no award.

Any comments? 

Hi Ruth - 1d should get them 10 points so standard mobility - equivalent to the old low rate care

Pardon the pun but the direction of travel on caselaw on 1d is very much as you describe. Coping having set out rather than being unable to set out in the first place but, as Daphne says, it does get you where you want to be in terms of protecting against a drop in income.

There is an obvious contradiction on 1e between “cannot” and regs 4 and 7. I seem to recall caselaw on that but can’t locate it as yet on here. My gut instinct is that you’re correct. Similar example is there’s been a recent trend of tribunals and some advisers going down the line that if you can drive at all then a number of these cannot apply. I think that’s wrong and I’m currently trying to trace a couple of UT cases that I was told had dealt with it positively.

I won’t repeat at length what I’ve already said about following journeys, except that I feel the government have successfully pulled off a bait and switch to greatly restrict L mobility for mental health without proper discussion.

That said:

1(e )  “Cannot undertake any journey because it would cause overwhelming distress to the claimant (10) It seems that they will not be awarded this if they can venture out of the house at all.”  However,  the regs state that to be considered able to do something you need to do it “safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and in a reasonable time period”  They also say that if one descriptor is satisfied on over half the days of the period, that descriptor will apply.  Therefore, despite the use of “any journey” could this descriptor apply to someone who has good and bad days and cannot go out on 50% of the time?

The DWP appear to have amended their guidance so that they now concede that this descriptor only has to apply on 50%+ of days, rather than every day, but they do still claim that one journey per day is sufficient.

However it seems at least arguable that a restriction below as many journeys as ‘are reasonably required’ per day still scores, as 4(2A) does not allow individual descriptors any opt out. 4(2A) is saying that even if C can complete a descriptor, C is nevertheless to be assessed as not being able to do so if he cannot do it repeatedly. The same might apply to the time taken before being able to undertake the journey.

Thanks everyone.  I have had a look again at the Assessors Handbook and it is clear that 1 (e) “cannot undertake any journey” is to be assessed in terms of what happens on the majority of days.  This will be helpful to some of my clients.  I can’t see anything about reg 4 (safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly, in a reasonable time period) but will look at the case law there.

  I think the group who will still lose out are those who:
(a) can make short familiar journeys on their own but can’t venture on an unfamiliar journey
or (b)  rely on someone with them for psychological support either familiar or unfamiliar journeys

The first group will not fit any descriptor because they can go out most days so long as it is local and they can actually navigate,  and the second group will meet criteria 1(b) but only gain 4 points.

Ruth

I’m not convinced on your a) from a couple of perspectives although that’s to your benefit. The majority of people I’ve come across who can’t make an unfamiliar journey make a small number of familiar journeys and don’t necessarily do them most days. Nor is it safe to assume that familar equals short.

Yes, you are right, “short” and “familiar” are not the same.  I agree it is very important to look at “the majority of days”.  On reflection, it may be even more important to look at “reliable” - one client I can think of will make, say,an attempt on three occasions to go out and see her GP and, if it is a good day, will manage on the last one - but even if she could manage that on a mathematical majority, she would not be able to predict which day is the good day.  However, we are still left with the client who forces herself to take her child to school and pick him up every day - think she will fall through all the descriptors no matter how restricted the rest of her life is. 

Ruth

My interest is in the definition of ‘planning’ a journey - the other half of the Activity.

Would you agree that this does not simply mean remembering a familiar route walked or driven in the past?

Surely some research and creative thought is required, so that what was unfamiliar then becomes familiar.