Jump to content


reallymadwoman

Final Criteria for PIP

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2485 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/pip-assessment-thresholds-and-consultation-response.pdf

 

From an initial reading someone who cannot go out alone to an unfamiliar place (e.g. because of agoraphobia) and who also has a mobility difficulty will qualify for a motability car and blue badge, but someone who can only walk between 20 metres and 50 metres will not. This is after telling us that 50 metres is considered to be the distance a claimant is required to be able to walk in order to achieve a basic level of independence outdoors.

 

I totally agree that the current system doesn't take enough account of problems unrelated to mobility difficulties, but this seems to me to be sheer madness. If those rules had applied last month I wouldn't now have my blue badge as I can walk about 35 metres, so to get to my GP (350 metres away) I would have to use a taxi as there's no parking that close. However, if I was able to walk up to 200 metres but was severely agoraphobic, instead of using the pay and display 100 metres away I could just use my motability car and badge to park right outside.

 

We know that the bottom line is cutting the benefits bill (they're anticipating 428,000 fewer people getting enhanced mobility than would have got high mobility) but thought the whole exercise was being made to appear to take better account of the extra costs involved with having a disability. Recognising that someone who can't go out alone is incurring greater costs than someone who can't go out at all is perfectly justifiable, but in the above scenario who is incurring the greater cost?

 

It is simply impractical and unaffordable to use taxis all the time so as well as a taxi fare for journeys such as the one described I still need a car and have to pay for tax, insurance and maintenance but get less benefit than the person on enhanced mobility whose car is paid for as well as the running costs but never has to pay for a taxi instead.

 

This is not in anyway belittling people with mental health problems - been there, done that and might just scrape the extra points I need for enhanced mobility but I somehow doubt it.


RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, how are all these who can walk between 20 & 50 meters going to actually get somewhere? 50 meters won't even get me to the bus stop.

 

That being said, I do think that mobility aids should be taken into account. It does seem unfair on DLA that a wheelchair user has far more independence (because they have a car on Mobility / can pay for taxis) that someone with severe sight problems.

 

PIP still makes no sense - there's nothing about supervision. I have a friend whose sister has a fainting disorder (they can't find anything medically wrong with her - brain and heart tests come back normal) and she needs supervision to stay safe. Yet, there is no supervision in PIP. Or is someone sustaining a serious injury ok?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is exactly the problem. It's 35 metres from my front door to the apartment building entrance, so to get anywhere I have to be collected from the entrance which means either a taxi or a blue badge because it's double yellows right outside and another 20 metres to the nearest parking space - coincidentally also blue badge only. The nearest non blue badge parking, our own parking space, is nearer 50 metres from the door.

 

If I have to, I can walk to the car but I can only do it once - e.g. I would have to be dropped off at the door on the way back and would struggle to reach the apartment and I'd be in agony for the rest of the day as well as half the night.


RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the PIP distances dependent on repeatability and being able to do so without any discomfort whatsoever?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although they deny it, the final version of the mobility descriptors is harsher than the the previous one.

 

Though I'll be interested to see what rates they set 'standard' and 'enhanced' rate at. Fairness would suggest that standard should be similar to mid rate care and high rate mob, but I doubt very much that this will happen.

 

On the other hand, my husband gets low care, low mob due to mental health, and on PIP should qualify for enhanced care, standard mob. Though under UC, both in a couple qualifying for an equivalent of mid/high rate care, means much less than it used to due to no double sdp and only one carer premium per joint claim. I can only hope UC dies a death.


We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't the PIP distances dependent on repeatability and being able to do so without any discomfort whatsoever?

 

Yes.

 

I am glad they mention financial decisions for PIP - very important I think. I should in theory get high rate on both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't the PIP distances dependent on repeatability and being able to do so without any discomfort whatsoever?

 

Theres a lot of stuff in that response and others about repeatability but I don't remember any mention of not being in any discomfort at all. If that were true, I can't walk at all because it always hurts. When assessing me for a blue badge the council worked on how far I could walk without needing to stop due to the discomfort.

 

I may be one of the lucky folk who don't lose out under PIP but only because my condition has worsened but I'm not willing to risk my current DLA award by having it reviewed. The mobility criteria are I think much stricter. The daily living criteria I'm not so sure about, other than losing the low rate. They seem much easier to apply than the DLA criteria, though I think they haven't really followed through on the cost thing - e.g. you don't get extra points for needing help at night when care is much more expensive and you get the same number of points for needing aids to wash your lower half or needing assistance, which pretty much puts the cost of a person to help at the same price as a loofah!


RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes ...

 

Theres a lot of stuff in that response and others about repeatability but I don't remember any mention of not being in any discomfort at all. If that were true, I can't walk at all because it always hurts ...

 

Thanks for the replies. I don't know, but if so then the distances for the mobility component aren't quite as harsh as they sound. My suspicion is that it will be the case. iirc, it is for DLA and they had to acknowledge it for ESA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've also changed the definition of aids so that they don't have to be specifically for disabled people which may help a lot of folks.

 

The example they give is using an electric tin opener would count as an aid if it's because you can't use a manual one, but not if it's through choice. That also means that things like an electronic diary to remind you to take tablets now counts as an aid if you wouldn't otherwise remember.

 

I've had another read of the information on 'repeatedly', 'reliably', etc and it doesn't really say if that's without any discomfort. Given that the advice in the ESA handbook is that activities do not need to be carried out without any discomfort I suspect they'll use the 'keep going until you have to stop' rule.

Edited by reallymadwoman

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if you have PIP, you can buy these aids. Without PIP, you may not be able to.

 

Is it really reasonable for them to expect you to buy expensive equipment which may not work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that, using preparing food as an example, previously if you only used aids that are commonly available to everyone, such as an electric tin opener, you didn't get the extra 2 points for needing to use an aid, and now you do. In pretty much all of the daily living activities needing to use an aid gets 2 points so now if someone needs a 'scrunchy on a stick' to wash their feet and a shoe horn to get their shoes on, that's 4 points already. Previously it would have been none unless they met another descriptor.


RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

reallymadwoman if i understand correctly from what you are saying aids are going to be defined as implements or tools not specifically adapted to assist you in completing a task you would not otherwise be able to do?

 

Sorry for the weird wording, but hoping it will lead to possible discussion on how what applies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Appendix One of the document linked to in post 1, aids and appliances are defined as:-

 

The assessment takes into account where individuals need aids and appliances to complete activities. In this context:

• Aids are devices that help a performance of a function, for example, walking sticks or spectacles.

• Appliances are devices that provide or replace a missing function, for example artificial limbs, collecting devices (stomas) and wheelchairs.

The assessment will take into account aids and appliances that individuals normally use and low cost, commonly available ones which someone with their impairment might reasonably be expected to use, even if they are not normally used.

 

This may include mainstream items used by people without an impairment, where the claimant is completely reliant on them to complete the activity. For example, this would include an electric can-opener where the claimant could not open a can without one, not simply where they prefer to use one.

 

Activity 11 refers specifically to ‘orientation aids’, which are defined as specialist aids designed to assist disabled people in following a route.

Claimants who use or could reasonably be expected to use aids to carry out an activity will generally receive a higher scoring descriptor than those who can carry out the activity unaided.


RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Though I'll be interested to see what rates they set 'standard' and 'enhanced' rate at. Fairness would suggest that standard should be similar to mid rate care and high rate mob, but I doubt very much that this will happen.

 

Yes, I think that's what Killer McVey said they would be set as in her statement the other day. I'll see if I can find the exact quote.

 

There it is:

 

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/newsroom/ministers-speeches/2012/13-12-12.shtml

 

Starting with the rates. I am pleased to confirm the rates for PIP will be set at the same rates as DLA.

 

The daily living enhanced rate of PIP will be the same as the higher rate care component of DLA

 

And the standard rate of the daily living component will be set at middle rate DLA care component

 

The mobility rates of PIP will be the same as the DLA rates

 

HTH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I think that's what Killer McVey said they would be set as in her statement the other day. I'll see if I can find the exact quote.

 

There it is:

 

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/newsroom/ministers-speeches/2012/13-12-12.shtml

 

 

 

HTH

 

Thanks CD, that statement is pretty damning. Just like with UC, a new benefit system is being used to disguise massive cuts in support - particularly in mobility support. She states that more half of those currently in receipt of DLA will receive either a reduced or zero award of PIP. There are positives to PIP for some, but sadly more negatives than positives. I am also concerned that with the loss of motability entitlement, many disabled people will lose the ability to get to work, and will be severely restricted in getting out. If a person can't walk to a bus stop, then taxis are the only option. Standard rate PIP is unlikely to cover the cost of taxis to and from work five days a week, let alone getting to any social activities, college etc. Whereas an able bodied person has the option of cheap bus travel, walking, cycling etc, a disabled person may have no choice but to shell out for taxis if they don't have their own car.


We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been mentioned on other Forums, there is, or could be a problem for the Government where someone who was told they were classified as 'Disabled for Life' then made life changing decisions based on that classification , If they then get booted off PIP there will be repercussions.

I'm hoping to get some legal advice on this in the New Year


Taking a poke at the world

 

Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

eh? Not all disabled people have care and /or mobility needs. I live with a person for whom this is true for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...