Family member awarded enhanced pip - AIBU?

If you look back through the thread you’ll see that this poster doesn’t have a very high opinion of anything that doesn’t cater to their own wants and needs - it seems that the hordes of fraudulent PIP claimants are stopping them from getting what they need, Motability is also shite apparently, because they won’t provide a wheelchair as well as a car using the mobility allowance, and because they won’t provide the thousands of pounds needed for more complex adaptations unless you undergo a means test - apparently the application process for the means test is a joke. Presumably because that poster doesn’t qualify. Confidently expecting this post to be deleted shortly.

I don’t think you meant yo quote my post?

It would be awesome if somebody could link to one of these 'social media' groups openly advocating and facilitating benefit fraud.

I'll wait.

I agree. The assessor who dealt with my DH's claim was actually very kind and he was awarded enhanced rate for both parts with a ten year award and light touch review. DWP do get it right for some people. But they need to get it right first time much more often.

You can't make a sweeping statement like that. Some are indeed the lowest of the low. Others are brilliant and make the effort to go the extra mile, like the one who assessed my DS. Like any person in a job, they come in all kinds.

I think this is the whole crux of the matter. DWP routinely look at the social media accounts of claimants across most benefits, not just PIP. They use the content to disallow claims if SM activity contradicts the terms of their claim, and I’ve known claimants who have had their benefits stopped or reduced after this kind of evidence has come to light. Most benefit claimants are aware that their social media accounts can be used in this way - it’s well publicised in DWP literature. That being the case I don’t really understand why you would openly flaunt a fraudulent claim on social media if you know you have a good chance of being rumbled as a result. I simply don’t believe people are that stupid.

There was a case in one of the newspapers not so long ago about a lady who stated on her claim that she was a full time wheelchair user. The DWP saw photos of her standing up at a wedding. They stopped her benefit, but subsequently had to reinstate it after she successfully appealed. She hadn’t wanted the wheelchair in the photograph, and her family had gathered either side of her to support her to stand. She produced other photos as evidence which clearly showed she was being supported from all sides.

So, bearing in mind that she was a genuine claimant, I think that demonstrates how easy it is for anyone, even DWP to misinterpret. I understand that people can be angry about those they see as ‘not disabled enough’ but disability is complex, there are a lot of things factored into a successful claim for PIP and other benefits, and what’s on the surface is very rarely all there is.

It’s possible to fly to India or anywhere else with arthritis or any other disability that impacts mobility.

What do you think about the content of the post otherwise?

You should report her then. If it’s all over her social
media then it won’t be difficult for the investigators to catch her out surely ? It’s people like that that are causing all the horrible attitudes towards disabled claimants. Many people just see the fraudsters & make assumptions that everyone is ‘at it’!

Made even more unfair by the fact that those claiming PIP after retirement age by way of an ongoing claim, can’t claim any part of the mobility allowance if they didn’t claim it before age 66. DWP use pension age as the cut off point for new claims, and new awards of mobility component, because they consider new mobility issues after that as age related. That being the case it doesn’t make sense to award someone the mobility component for ten years when they’re already on the cusp of reaching retirement.

I don't mean to be confrontational, but I think it is unacceptable for you to share details of your client in this way. If she were on this site she would recognise herself. Really unprofessional.

This too. I can quite see how a benefit like PIP can be absorbed into everyday costs and how claimants come to rely on it, but it was a definite problem trying to convince some claimants that they must report the change. I also saw a good many PIP claimants who were working when they first claimed PIP and by the time they had come to the PIP review they were unemployed/sick for various reasons, so money was far tighter and PIP was the difference between making ends meet or not.

I am autistic but “higher functioning” (whatever that means as I still have a lot of support needs) and my assessor gave me a short award of a lower rate because they think the help I am getting will enable me to be more independent one day which isn’t how it works lol

Like I said in my last assessment I think for ongoing conditions that are not going to change, there should be no further assessments, i think they are looking into changing this, let's hope so.

I agree but on the other hand my son has severe autism and learning disabilities, he's 14 ,non verbal, cognitively around 2 or 3 goes to a school for children with severe and profound learning disabilities, his circumstances are not going to significantly improve ,he currently gets HRC and HRM under SMI
I don't anticipate these rates changing when he moves to PIP ,but mu understanding is the longest he can be awarded for is 10 years .

I had a client recently who applied for PIP a few weeks before turning state pension age and was awarded for a mainly arthiritic knee. She was awarded ten years which is completely crazy as she could be offered a knee replacement within a few years. Obviously you hope she would report the change but she talked about this award "setting her up for her retirement " as if it's just an extra boost to her pension. Like you I have to tell people over and over about the implications of not reporting changes. Not only did the PIP award give her an extra £100 a week but then an extra £81 of pension credit too, so £180 odd pound a week extra. First thing she did was book an extended trip to India with all the backpay after maintaining she could barely walk.

I agree with this 100%. I’ve seen it myself. The payments get absorbed into household budgets and claimants become reliant on them. So when their condition changes they are reluctant to report it in case the award is lowered or stopped. Even when completing review forms I’ve had real difficulty in making claimants understand that they are committing benefit fraud if they don’t report the change.

The DWP have introduced a system of ‘light touch’ reviews for those with open ended and ten year awards - these are the people with mainly permanent conditions which are unlikely to improve. I think that’s sensible, but at the same time I think some of the awards for low level disability should be reviewed far sooner than they are because, and I hate to say this, it was made clear to me on several occasions that some claimants’ conditions had improved or resolved long before they had received the official review. I’m not sure the obligation to report a change promptly, or the consequences of not doing so are made clear enough.

Totally agree with this! And I can empathise with people who are scared to lose that income. It can be difficult to get back to employment, more support is required. But it’s unfair that people are still claiming when they no longer qualify, while others have valid claims rejected. It’s a very difficult problem for the govt/DWP to ensure claimants are dealt with fairly & financial support awarded correctly to those in genuine need.

I agree that not all assessors are created equal, but good or bad, they all have basic rules to follow and ensuring that the claimants they are assessing have the most robust medical evidence to support it is one of them. Rather than fraudulently claiming it’s mostly been my experience that claimants have fallen foul of assessors who, for one reason or another haven’t properly referred to that medical evidence, or haven’t the skills to understand it and haven’t bothered to seek clarity. Consequently they’ve failed to appreciate the full extent of the effects of that claimants’ disability, which reflects in the level of award.

I’ve seen some really lazy assessment reports - full of contradictions and clearly failing to understand, and properly assess some of the functional ability. I’ve also had claimants showing me assessment reports in which things are documented that didn’t actually happen during the face to face interview. One claimant showed me an assessment report in which the assessor provided full documentation of the range of movement in limbs on examination, including estimated angles and expected functional ability. All without laying a finger on the claimant !! So I do tend to err on the side of the claimant, because by the nature of my work, the majority were those who had lost out through no fault of their own.

And regarding your question to the OP, I suspect they aren’t coming back. Hopefully some of the replies here have made them think before they report.

I've been an advisor for a number of years and helped a lot of people to apply. I think there is a massive problem with people not being awarded what they should. I know I'll be shouted down but I also think there's a significant amount of people that are on higher awards than they should be and as others have highlighted I think it's often that they did qualify originally and have not reported changes when their conditions have improved. I think people just become completely reliant on the money and then it becomes hard to manage without it. If you've been on benefits for a while and then your condition improves, it must be scary to be worried about a sudden drop in income and it's not always easy to replace that income for example getting a job if you've not worked for some time. There needs to be more thorough assessments when a condition can improve, and no further assessments when a condition is chronic and unlikely to improve.

So many people seem ‘jealous’ of disabled people! We owned our small 2 bed house. 3 small kids & a DH with progressive MS which left him unable to work & really struggling with mobility. We were advised to apply for council housing & after a few years were allocated a 3 bed bungalow.
We pay full rent for this, no housing benefit. Our previous home was owned outright due to a critical illness policy paying off our small mortgage. But we were unable to get a mortgage for a suitable home, big enough for a growing family & suitable for a wheelchair user. So the proceeds from our house sale has been used to provide a better standard of living & security for our family. The resentment from others was quite an eye opener.
My DH was 29 on diagnosis, lost his career & independence & is now entirely reliant on others for everything! But I have had comments from people over the years that seem to think he has a great life , doesn’t have to work but isn’t living in dire poverty, has had holidays abroad etc ( not anymore he is barely able to leave the house & we haven’t been on holiday for 5 years). People just don’t seem to realise how hard some people have it & hate the idea they’re getting something they’re not!
DH gets enhanced PIP but nothing else as we have done savings (from house sale) & I have a decent salary from my pt job. My own sister made a comment years ago about him getting the equivalent of a pt wage while being able to be a SAHD. No concept of how much my DC had to do for themselves & how hard the school run etc was for DH!

No, she absolutely wouldn’t. If she is in receipt of the standard mobility component of PIP and has an ongoing award, she can’t claim the enhanced component because she is over the age of 66. But stopping the PIP claim and claiming AA instead would make her much worse off because she would lose the mobility component altogether - there is no mobility component to AA.

I find the anecdotes of people manipulating the system to claim disability benefits really difficult to believe, and very far from my own experience. We tried to claim PIP for my husband due to the impact of his mental illness. It was refused and we appealed up to and beyond tribunal. It was still refused.

A few months after the refusal, he was in hospital under section, and now he is in a care home.

My youngest son who is basically trapped in a routine of rituals and anxiety disorders also applied and was awarded two points. This was despite letters from his psychiatrist and notes from safeguarding meetings.

I know each case is decided according to its own context, but for every story of someone twisting the system, there must be hundreds of examples of people who are debilitated by their illnesses of impairments, but cannot access benefits that may support them.

You're right, I didn't mean to quote this particular post, I was referring to the OPs original statement, but if the claimant has admitted to wilfully and knowingly lying in their application/assessment then their claim is false.

I've read through some of your other responses and I really respect your ethic and stance on this but not all assessors are made equal, they're not all good at their jobs, and fraudulent claims do exist.

Either way, my question really was what the OP was intending to do about it.