I’m a PIP assessor, happy to advise if I can

[Impr90]

Hello all,

If you’ve got any questions you think I might be able to help with, please let me know

All the best for the New Year

I came across this several times, and a lot of it during Covid. With home visits assessors will carry out the assessments en bloc and then write the reports later. If they’re not meticulously organised they can mix claimants up. Phone assessments are problematic too, because the assessor can’t see the claimant so there is no nuance or observation of restrictions etc.

Having read the full report and the responses to the subsequent complaint, it was clear they were lies rather than mixing up cases.

What I meant was that if you want to make an official complaint don’t do it as part of an MR - make it a separate issue and write directly to DWP as a complaint. I’ve detailed as to how you can do this, and if you have a good MP you should get them involved - I’ve found that it can make a difference to the outcome.

My MP is useless but thanks. I've had to get them involved in something else and they weren't great.

The bit I am confused about is this: if the evidence you submit with it doesn’t warrant a change in award, you’ll get the same decision again

I didn't submit new evidence. I literally said the assessor says x but my evidence from my consultant says y. That type of thing. So from what you're saying I shouldn't have had an award on MR?

Which is why it’s important to challenge. I’ve never come across intentional lies, but I’ve no doubt it happens - as cited upthread there was a prominent case a couple of years ago where assessors from one particular assessment provider were found to be writing up reports before they had even seen the claimants. I’ve never really understood why it happens given the possible consequences for the assessor, but I do know that DWP rely on some claimants simply accepting crap decisions. Especially those with mental health conditions or on the ASD spectrum because it’s simply too difficult for them to challenge.

You definitely can get an award on MR, yes, because it doesn’t go to the same decision maker, so you get a fresh pair of eyes on the decision. But in the majority of cases, if the claimant doesn’t submit fresh evidence with the MR they tend to get the same decision again unless there is a blatant error either on the part of the assessor or the decision maker. It sounds like this was the case for you.

know that DWP rely on some claimants simply accepting crap decisions. Especially those with mental health conditions or on the ASD spectrum because it’s simply too difficult for them to challenge.

That's disgusting of DWP and I'd be very interested to understand how you know this. (I have ASD and some other MH conditions)

As a caseworker I’ve attended tribunals in the past and in some cases DWP have been severely criticised for it. One tribunal chairman suggested fining DWP for every case that goes to tribunal and wins, in order to get them to fix their errors at the MR stage rather than forcing the claimant to a full appeal. Most disability organisations accept that it’s much harder for those with MH conditions to appeal, so they simply accept the decision handed to them because they can’t face the stress of appeal. DWP have been accused many times of capitalising on this.

A few of us on here have said our assessments were fine. But it's a difficult process no matter no professionally and supportively it's done. Questions such as 'can you wipe your own bottom' 'can you wash under your arms' etc are part of the assessment as they are core functional daily activities. But no one likes answering these types of questions, they feel rude, intrusive and highlight your own difficulties and sadness around having lost independence. It's feels like a test which is stressful. My assessor was pleasant, allowed me to take breaks when I became overwhelmed and produced a very fair (tbh she was much more 'generous' than I thought she would have been when I got my award. But it was really tough, I cried for days after as it was so painful to explain to a stranger just how much independence I had lost. I swore that I would never put myself through that again, I wouldn't reapply as it harmed my mental health, and that was nothing to do with the assessor. Fortunately that was 3+ years ago and I haven't been asked to do a reassessment yet.

If you asked people 'did you enjoy having a tooth out' 'did you enjoy taking your driving test', the vast majority (apart from my crazy DH who weirdly enjoys the dentist) will say no, it was hard/,stressful/horrible. I have a kind professional dentist but I absolutely hate going to see her due to my fears and previous experiences, I would never say I had a good experience.

Yes, I agree some people will have had uncaring/unprofessional assessors, or course they will, there are bad apples in every job. But for many, it's a horrible experience due to the pain of talking to a stranger about your challenges rather than due to them being an inherently mean person.

I typed a whole long screed but there's no point.

I'm getting upset by the fact that you won't use the word lies about what happened to me. It feels like minimising the effect it had on me and the upset it caused and continues to cause me.

I appreciate that may not be your intention but it is how it's making me feel so I won't be responding to that element of what you say any longer.

I had lies written about me. Lies. And I'm entitled to call it lies and I won't let anyone minimse what it was.

Sadly, that isn’t something unique to PIP or DLA. It also happens with things like EHCPs, social care support, adult CHC funding/children’s continuing care funding, DFGs…

I think the OP has abandoned…

However, I’d like to add that the assessors doing the job would all agree with anyone who says the system isn’t fit for purpose and needs a huge overhaul.

I think the public often thinks we sit in luxury offices, earning a fortune and laughing as we write a pack of lies in order to collect a bonus from the DWP.

The experience I have with my colleagues is that we very often empathise with many of the people we talk to, wish we could do more to help (but we are limited by the parameters set by the DWP) and feel terrible when there’s not enough evidence there to recommend an award.

Behind the scenes, the pressures on assessors are huge and things like time restrictions are very problematic at times. The DWP as an organisation don’t care (we’ve pointlessly attended meetings, completed surveys, given feedback, suggested changes, highlighted specific cases to demonstrate the issues), but many assessors do.

You asked me a question, and l answered it. You’re anbsolutely entitled to call it whatever you want. And in view if the fact that l’m not familiar with the details of your case l’m entitled to stay neutral. I’m not using the word lies or anything else as inflammatory because l don’t know it’s the case. I’m not minimising what you’ve said at all, l’m just not in a position to say l agree or disagree.

@PIPnamechanged just interested to know what, with the same amount of money, you would change in the system, apart from less wastage around appeals?

As someone has said, there has been a huge increase in claimants, with no more money to give out (every department - dwp, nhs, education, social care all asking for more money, but if give more to one then have to take from another)- do you think this has made it harder/the thresholds higher?

I'm sure I will be shot down for this, but would introducing more bands be helpful? Currently only 2 for mobility and 3 for care, how about lower bands with lower thresholds and lower payments?
I would definitely prefer to get a little less if it meant that others could be treated more fairly.

@Bushmillsbabe

It’s the million dollar question isn’t it?

From the assessor perspective, I’d change it so that cases are routed appropriately to the workers that suit the case. Give the mental health ones to the MH specialists, for example. Currently it’s random allocation.

I’d also make it so that all calls are automatically recorded. This thread is full of he said/she said experiences and recordings would cut that out instantly.

In terms of the application process, I’d make it mandatory that a claimant cannot have an assessment without evidence. I can’t begin to tell you how many people submit no evidence and refuse to provide GP details, yet claim for up to 15 conditions. How does anyone expect to be awarded benefit with zero proof? It’s an absurd expectation.

I think as a society we’re becoming very focused on any issue being diagnosed. If you get anxious meeting new people, it must be a health condition, so claim. If you need to turn the TV volume up higher now, it’s a health issue so claim.

Tik Tok is full of “experts” claiming to tell people how to claim. We’re at the stage where it’s seen as free money to anyone who’s ever had any issue (I get forms with people writing about how they had a broken leg aged 6 in 1992), thus the claims are overwhelming the system. These people will never be given an award, but they’re taking up assessment slots and therefore delaying the process for people in genuine need.

I also wish more time would be spent telling the public what we actually consider in a claim. People alwaaaays say that a certain thing they said wasn’t noted and so the assessor is a liar, but have no idea that it’s omitted because it’s irrelevant to the claim.

Interesting point RE the 3 tier system. I’m really not sure what (if any) changes will be made. There are currently only 2 levels for both mobility and daily living. Not sure what benefit has 3 levels, but it’s not PIP.

PIP only has 2 levels of care. DLA has 3 levels for care.

I do feel that more levels are needed too. 8 points is actually quite a lot.

I agree with this. So many people (on social media mainly) claiming neuro divergence, ehlers danlos, fibromyalgia and similar but having no evidence to back it up. It frustrates me no end as they are genuinely disabling conditions that are being seen as the new bad back and dismissed as such.

I agree in principle but the difficulty for some - even with diagnosed conditions, is obtaining the evidence to support their claim. A straightforward copy of a clinician letter to GP is unlikely to clarify whether the condition is likely to satisfy the assessment descriptors, and if the claimant requests their own evidence from a consultant, etc, they will likely have to pay for it. Claimants are asked to list their GP contact details and those of any other healthcare professionals involved with the claimant. If that information is there, why are assessors not using it ? Why ask it in the first place if you’re going to rely just on what the claimant can provide ?

I do think that time constraints on assessors because of the sheer number of applications has to be factored in, but at the same time, if the assessment is perfunctory and doesn’t take account of evidence which may be only a phone call or a letter away from the assessor, then to a certain extent I can see why so many claimants are successful at tribunal.

Agree with this. I’ve tried several times upthread to clarify that because a claimant doesn’t agree with something on the report, or the assessor doesn’t see their condition in the same way as the claimant, it doesn’t mean the assessor is telling lies. It’s very difficult to try to explain to claimants who have very little knowledge of exactly how the assessment works, so yes, I think you’re right when you say that there should be more information available about how the assessment works and what the criteria are. It would maybe stop the spurious claims for conditions which are never going to meet the criteria if the potential claimant is fully aware of what the requirements are, and can judge for themselves that they have little chance of success.

As an outreach worker, I’ve come across some howling mistakes, including a couple where home assessments have taken place and the assessor has clearly mixed up the paperwork, but this has always been rectified. And I know there are always rogues in any organisation, as evidenced by the case a couple of years ago where assessors from one provider were writing the reports in advance of actually seeing the claimant. But this is the exception rather than the rule and my experience is that most assessors report on what they observe and the evidence available. My own assessment report contained a few mistakes - even though I consider the right level of benefit was awarded - and a puzzling two page detailed report on the degree to which I could bend and flex limbs, grip strength, etc, when the assessor hadn’t actually asked me to demonstrate any of it and I never moved from my wheelchair throughout the assessment. The one thing I did come across regularly was that claimants were disputing the assessor’s note that they had refused to be physically examined. All were adamant that they had never been asked, and I do wonder whether the fact that the wording for this was so similar on each report indicates that this was down to the software rather than the assessor themselves.

On the question of evidence, I’m of the opinion that more time should be allowed for assessors to gather evidence themselves from the healthcare professionals listed on claimant applications. In practice I’ve come across claimants who have found it really difficult to obtain evidence - especially from their GP, who in most cases will only provide a copy of the GP record, and they will charge for it. Similarly consultants will charge a claimant for a detailed report which is beyond a copy of what is sent to the claimants’ GP as routine. I know time constraints are a factor, but I don’t see the point of asking for the details of claimants’ healthcare providers if they’re not going to be contacted in the absence of suitable evidence provided by the claimant themselves. I think if this element could be improved on, it may result in fewer tribunal applications.

DLA (both for under 16s and those 16+ still on DLA) has 3 rates of the care component. I doubt the government will introduce a third rate for the PIP care component. That would cost more since it was the lowest rate they did away with when PIP was introduced.

@Rosscameasdoody if all the GP will provide/all the patient wants is a copy of their medical records, the person should make the request via a SAR. That way, GPs cannot charge unless the request is ‘manifestly unfounded or excessive’ or further copies are requested. In those cases, a ‘reasonable fee’ for administrative costs is allowed. A straightforward SAR for medical records would not fall under the ‘manifestly unfounded or excessive’ criteria. If GPs tried to charge, the patient should complain to the ICO.

There are also people that take the mick though I have said this on other threads I'm o n various Facebook groups for Children on DLA and I see regularly people putting in claims for very tenuous reasons with zero evidence it's frustrating and clogs up the systems for genuine claimants

The issue I had with a SAR is that they wanted me to physically present in the GP surgery with my ID to put in the SAR, then take it home and fill it in, and go back in to hand it in. There was no way to do it remotely, via a home visit, or in only one trip.
As I am housebound, the GP is a mile away and the information I needed was available in my NHS app, I didn't put myself through it.

@InMySpareTime the GP should not be requiring you state and they must make reasonable adjustments. When you post “then take it home and fill it in, and go back in to hand it in.” I presume you mean the GP is requiring a certain form completed. The ICO is even clear that isn’t the case. They state a SAR can be requested verbally or via social media. If you have someone who could/would help you, you can also give a third party the right to make the request on your behalf.

I don't know what should or shouldn't happen but that's what the GP receptionist asked me to do. She would not accept my offer to send my DH in with my ID ("we have to prove it's actually you asking") and suggested I post back the form instead of coming back in (the post box is as far away as the GP). I already have access to my full medical records via the NHS app, so I just used my app records and screenshots in my PIP application.
Sometimes things that seem simple become unnecessary complicated when disability is involved.

@InMySpareTime if you ever need to make a SAR in the future and the organisation is difficult, you can complain to the ICO. Sometimes a SAR can be more helpful than the NHS apply because a SAR can include things that won’t show on your NHS app e.g. some emails between HCPs.