To think that my PIP assessor has deliberately told lies?

[Godstopper]

Previous thread here:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3107566-AIBU-to-be-terrified-of-my-PIP-assessment

To update: I requested a copy of the assessor's report which arrived today. If the DWP decision maker follow this (as I expect they will), then I will lose £90 a month as I'll only receive standard care. I have a total of ten points: 2 for requiring an aid to bathe and 8 for communicating (deaf).

I recorded the assessment (with permission). The assessor can be heard on tape 3-5 times asking if I wanted to stop as I was visibly upset. She can also be heard offering me a tissue.

Here are some of the lies (I have no qualms about making this public - people need to see what is going on):

Cooking: "Reported restrictions that her partner will do most of the cooking. She feels that she is unsafe due to vertigo, reduced concentration, reduced motivation, requires supervision and prompting to be able to cook. Whilst acknowledging that she receives some cognitive behavioural therapy once a week for her mental health she appears well nourished. Therefore it would be clinically probable that she is able to carry out this task independently on the majority of days in a repeated, reliable, and safe manner."

Managing Therapy: "Reports that she is taken to therapy once a week by her partner. Functional history however reports that she will go into therapy on her own. She did not appear withdrawn and did not require prompting. She attends the therapy sessions on her own. Therefore it is clinically probable that she is able to complete this activity independently in a repeated, reliable, and safe manner on the majority of days."

Engaging with People: Reports to have restrictions engaging with others. Functional history reports that she is able to engage with her partner. Informal observations - did not require prompting, did not appear anxious, able to engage adequately well at assessment, adequate eye contact and rapport was maintained at assessment. Whilst acknowledging that she has cognitive behavioural therapy she did not appear withdrawn or anxious. Therefore it is clinically probable that she can perform this task independently on the majority of days in a repeated, reliable, and safe manner."

Mobility: "Reported restriction that she is unsafe due to her deafness and mental health problems. Will attend GP appointments on her own (THE SURGERY IS LITERALLY DOWN THE ROAD!). She did not appear withdrawn and did not need prompting. Therefore it is clinically probable that he (!!) could carry out this activity independently on the majority of days in a reliable, repeated, and safe manner."

And on it goes.

We are obviously off to appeal: it is now my mission to ensure that the cost of this dwarfs the £90 a month that they will save by awarding me a reduced rate. All lies are on tape. I am also going to do my best to impact her professionally by complaining to her registration body and taking it as far as I possibly can. A complaint about the quality of the report will also be made to ATOS.

Their response will determine if the recording makes it into the public domain. I am not afraid to name and shame either.

She couldn't lie about my deafness (I had an interpreter) but thought she could get me on my MH issues. This is what is happening to vulnerable people under reforms and it's disgusting.

In my extended family if over thirty people, we have one full time wage earner. Yes one. If we took this and looked at providing food as a proxy for income, the one wage earner or food gatherer would have much work to do. It therefore becomes almost irrelevant how much support the others need - the equation becomes one of availability of supply and rightly, criteria would be altered.

Imagining that you never need alter criteria, is presuming that the money is in plentiful supply.

About recording.

I covertly recorded mine, submitted the transcript of the recording as part of the appeal, and have now received the DWP's paperwork for the appeal.

They haven't made any protest against the recording. In fact they've included my transcript in their paperwork.

So I RECORDED COVERTLY AND HAD THE RECORDING ACCEPTED BY THE DWP.

I'll keep you updated if the DWP or tribunal try to reject it at any stage.

Perking,

Did you do the transcript yourself? I have some concerns at the expense - it's about 90 mins. Also, did you transcribe at MR stage?

Hi Janey,

I suspect that the DWP have already made, or about to make, their decision. I had a letter which says they have all the information we need.

I've heard of some people calling and asking them to postpone the decision due to issues with their report. Do you think that's possible?

A family member and I did the transcript, working in shifts and checking each other's work. It was very tiring and had to be spread over many days.

After I'd sent it in, I got cold feet and paid for a professional transcription as well. It costs less if you give a longer time frame - which of course makes it tight with the turnaround to the DWP. So I've got that as back-up if the slimey little shits start whining they can't trust the transcription. But as I say, they haven't raised a peep against it so far.

I didn't tell the DWP at the Mandatory Reconsideration phase that I had a recording, just submitted my transcription at the appeal phase.

Basically, because they'd so overtly lied in the assessment report - which strongly appears to have been amended, and bears a submission date 2 days after the actual assessment - I decided the people I was dealing with at the DWP were incorrigible, self-serving liars who would do anything to throw people off DLA/PIP. So I would keep my powder dry for the independent appeal tribunal.

(My judgement of the DWP was rapidly vindicated because I did point out at MR that CCTV covering the building would easily prove the ATOS report lied when it said I had used no aids to walk. Their response was to just drop that line from the Reconsideration letter without comment. So completely unbothered about relying on known liars.)

Reporting from August last year:

UK judges rule DWP wrong to deny appeals over refused benefits
www.theguardian.com/society/2017/aug/04/uk-judges-rule-dwp-wrong-to-deny-appeals-over-refused-benefits

"It comes after a freedom of information request revealed the DWP has a target to uphold 80% of its original benefit decisions after the internal “mandatory reconsideration” reviews."

OK, here's a thing from the Benefits & Work guide to the process
( Challenge To A Personal Independence Payment (PIP) Decision, Jan 2017 ).

Tribunals are public hearings, so in theory the public can attend. In practice they don’t. Sometimes someone from the DWP or a Citizens Advice Bureau who is learning about tribunals may wish to observe. You will normally be told if anyone else is attending and you can ask for the hearing to be held in private, though the final decision is the judge’s.

Soooo, presumably a journalist can attend.

Also, I keep encountering uncertainty around when it's OK to covertly record someone. From what I'm reading, it does seem to be generally OK to covertly record when the person knows you are there listening/participating (ie, not bugging a room and leaving). It also seems least controversial when you're doing it for the purpose of proving the content of the conversation, rather than simply to publish on YouTube, say.

Recording to submit to a tribunal if necessary seems to be one of the less controversial uses. And once it's in the court record for a public tribunal, I would guess - but don't know for certain - that the transcript is now part of the public record. So I think it might be uncontroversial to give to a journalist / self-publish at this point.

I Am Not A Lawyer! Proceed at own risk...

I've just re-read the report.

In her "observations" box it says:

"Was reading from prompting notes on her knee."

She then goes on to award me zero for engaging with others. How are these two things compatible? This is how I deal with real life situations: I prompt myself with notes as otherwise I can't speak (different on-line where I do chat away).

Does prompting have to be from another person? Or does my relying on notes to speak also constitute a prompt?

Hi Janey,

That sounds like a possible route. Is it as simple as calling to ask them to postpone until you have complained to ATOS/IAS? Or do you have to explain what is wrong with the report on the phone (I wouldn't know where to begin!).

Still thinking out loud.

The interpreter's name is on the report. Would it be unethical to contact her for a brief statement? I mean, she was a witness. But I don't know if this is entirely appropriate since her role was to relay information to me.

I had one ask me why I didn't have an abortion.

Head that sounds awful for you and your family. If it's not outing, how does it happen when statistically it sounds off the scale?

Bloody hell Viley, I don't know what to say. I hope you complained.

I was asked if I'd considered suicide and why not (!). That's what made me upset at one point. Then came questions about self-harm and wanting to know my history. I never claimed this on my form and resented being asked about it. I am not actively suicidal. Though this process has demonstrably worsened my mental health. I'm going to make sure this is on my medical records for appeal purposes.

Questions that seemed normal have been revealed to be insidious. For example, she infers that I can engage with people unaided partly because I go into therapy on my own. Yes, but my partner drives me more or less to the door. It would be extraordinarily inappropriate for anyone else to be in the room. She has also used that to say I need zero help for managing therapy (less than 3.5 hours a week as per the descriptor).

Another one she has made a big deal out of is my visiting the G.P. She omits that it is two minutes away. This is then used to justify my travelling all over the place.

Then we've got "does not take medication for mental health issues" throughout. But it's documented that I cannot do so. The language makes all the difference: it should be "is unable to take medication" and then explain that I am still trying to engage with treatment by going to therapy.

Her code of conduct is far short of what's expected of a medical professional to say the least. I've got her registration number today so starting my complaint this week.

I was asked a couple of off the wall things and I described various disabilities, the 'invisible' kind which were totally ignored as the assessor had never heard of them, so, if ever I need to advocate for someone again, I will insist the interview is recorded.

Have you tried different medication? Might that help?
I think using prompt notes is a quite normal thing to do though so I dnot think there is an issue with that?

I had to go through this last year, was desperately ill with mh. Was told it was a sure thing- it was anything but. When I spoke to a manager on the phone after, I outright said to him ‘so someone with bipolar is simply unable to claim based on what you have just said’ him ‘no, you’re just not sick enough’ 😡😡
Just had another application and meeting based on new physical disability diagnosis. I think it went well, the atos woman was certainly nicer and I felt able to talk to her and be more open than the last one- more able to let my emotions show too. So she saw how it affected me emotionally and she asked questions that helped me open up more about other aspects so in some ways she asked leading questions- but to my benefit. I’ll come back and update when I get my award letter and what way it goes

I've just filled in my Has anything changed form! Wish me luck. I've sent a GP letter and a consultants letter with it. Hopefully that's enough to avoid a face to face!

Hi Hives,

It's a response to SSRI's in general so I don't think it's worth the risk, and my G.P agrees. Unless I became, say, suicidal (not unlikely as one goes through this process), then I think going to therapy should be the mainstay of treatment for now.

I guess having notes is not unusual. I'd suggest that what's more unusual is being unable to speak without a prompt. As it is, I've just found case law which says engaging with the assessor is not evidence of being able to engage more generally. So even if I was chatting away (false), she'd be on shaky ground as I have evidence to back up my social difficulties.

The assessor can be heard on tape saying how she can see things affect me quite significantly - "for much of my daily life" was the phrase she used. She can also be heard asking if I wanted to stop at various points with me audibly upset. So she's tripped herself up somewhat here.

Sadly, I suspect the pressure is on her to minimize my award. Scotland has it right by banning private companies from being involved in making welfare decisions. Ethics start to become a bit blurred once one is motivated by profit.

I did. I hope this gets sorted for you.

Op I feel for you my dh claims pip at standard rate but defiantly qualifies for the higher rate (his Dr told him and he does pip assessments too) but were too scared to appeal and end up with nothing.

The Dr told me I would be entitled to pip also because of my mh problems but when I'm struggling to tell the Dr what's going on I've got no chance of telling a pip assessor.

I don't understand why Drs and consultants advice is being ignored by dwp why can't you go to drs they sign your pip form. Done.

Please bear with me on this.

I find it hard to believe that the assessors are just lying. It’s a professional job and presumably, if a lot of their decisions where overturned at appeal, they would be “found out”.

Yet lots of people seem to be having their appears upheld. What is happening? Are the assessors undertrained? Looking for the wrong things? Using wrong measures or something?