Family member awarded enhanced pip - AIBU?

[Orangecrocs]

My family member has just been awarded enhanced pip in both living and mobility components.
Shes told me that she’s twisted the truth during the assessment and told the assessor that she has lots of pain and can’t really walk at all, but she walks all the time as I see her out and about - we live in a hilly area. I know people who are in a wheelchair and struggle to get enhanced rate - so I really don’t understand how she’s managed this.
I know people will say mind your own business but she’s told me she’s actually lied to them.

Well, no. This poster has a fair point - means testing is irrelevant when you’re talking about how the benefit is spent, and state pension isn’t ‘earned’ it’s a state benefit like all the others, paid for from general taxation.

Benefits are paid as cash, in most cases directly into a bank account. There is no requirement to account for how they are spent. So any attempt to scrutinise what a universal disability benefit is spent on, or to limit that spending via vouchers and other means, could, and probably would be seen as discriminatory. For it not to be so, the same conditions would have to be applied to all benefits. So those advocating for such scrutiny of the spending of disabled claimants, might want to think how they would feel if they were forced to account for how they spend child benefit, student grant, or indeed, state pension. Not such an attractive prospect now is it ?

Bullshit which anyone who has experienced a pip assessment will know.

And whilst benefit fraud is appalling it's absolutely not the reason our country is a shit show

Well the fact is they can spend it on whatever they want….and no need to justify to anyone

I agree - input from this type of professional involved with the claimant will potentially be more useful because it can give a much clearer indication of functional ability instead of just a blanket medical description of the condition.

This. Far more money is lost through tax fraud, for example.

People who get so frothy on this feel free to swap with me. Apparently I’m not bloody applicable fif it anyway, even the fact I can barely walk and my life span is limited. Feel free, I’d rather have my body than have the extra money.

To walk when I want, to go and buy the paper, to have friends again because I can follow a conversation again and reliably meet up with them without my whole body blaring in pain due to joint contractures and scoliosis.

I wish I’d had kids, a family. I’d swap in a heartbeat. In fact the only thing that keeps me going is that the field of gene therapy seems to be rapidly moving and they’ve now started testing one for my gene mutation, fingers crossed it’s before my heart starts failing.

Sorry that was a bit of a whinge I apologise!!

Don't apologise. Please do apply for PIP again or appeal. It is outrageous that you have been turned down.

@PandoraSox thanks, I didn’t mean to have a go at anyone just moaning in the void. I’m glad for this thread because it’s made me think I’m being a martyr not trying again.

You’re missing the point. The purpose of PIP is to level the playing field so that disabled people can take part in society on the same terms as non disabled people. The clue is in the same personal independence payment, so if disabled people want to go to the cinema and the only way they can manage that is by taxi, what’s the problem ? It’s a legitimate extra cost. Are you saying they shouldn’t be able go out and socialise because it costs them slightly more ? REALLY ?? There are two models for assessing the financial cost of disabilty - social and medical. PIP relies very heavily on the medical model, which is deliberate because it makes it harder to claim, forcing the claimant to think about what they cannot do, rather than what they could do if they had the extra benefit. But the intention of PIP is to make the lives of substantially disabled people easier. And that includes socialising. Why wouldn’t it ?

It’s not a whinge @Thelastebs. I would think most people who are genuinely disabled and in receipt of PIP are probably feeling the same reading some of these comments.

Yep. Benefit claimants are far easier to target, and disability benefit claimants have always been the low hanging fruit in every round of welfare reform, regardless of the colour of government. This government could have chosen to put the minds of disabled people at rest by confirming they won’t be taking up the proposals in the last Tory consultation paper. They could have been less tight lipped about their plans for disability benefits during the run up to the election. They didn’t. They chose to keep disabled people hanging on, anxious about what may be coming. So logically, either the news is bad and benefits will be harshly targeted or, they will be largely left alone with maybe some tinkering around the edges, and Labour will be seen as Lady Bountiful !! I think the latter is doubtful.

IMO Labour are no different from the Tories, in this respect, and what really concerns me is that they don’t appear to know the difference between out of work sickness benefits and universal disability benefits. If you don’t understand what a benefit is designed to do, how can you possibly target it at those who will benefit most ?

To the two posters who are obviously in need of PIP, please do apply again. It's worth it in the end, even if it is a horrid procedure. Most PIP appeals end in success.

Don’t apologise 💐

How would you know ? DWP don’t report back to whoever has reported suspected benefit fraud. They absolutely do investigate and the fact that nothing has changed, suggests that the person isn’t doing anything wrong. The fact that so many people have reported, and some more than once, is more than suggestive of a lack of understanding of disability and the purpose of PIP. Sounds to me like this person has a disability you don’t know the first thing about and aren’t qualified to judge.

Exactly. And the whole of that post assumes that the tax payer foots the bill for Motability. They don’t. It’s a charity - the only government input is supplying the enhanced rate of mobility allowance to those who qualify. That pays the basic lease costs. Anything else is an overhead which has to be paid for by the claimant.

And as harsh as that may sound for those who require more expensive adaptations to be able to drive, that’s as it should be. For those who have difficulty and meet the thresholds, Motability will help towards the costs of adaptations.

The enhanced rate of mobility allowance is £75.75 a week. To be able to lease a vehicle for the three or five year period, with insurance/maintenance included is a gift in itself. To expect it to stretch to leasing a wheelchair or scooter in addition to that vehicle, and to cover the costs of adaptations isn’t realistic.

She has openly told us that she has fraudently claimed and is not disabled. HTH.

I didn't mention anything about the tax payer.

Ah, cool. So we should be grateful for our wonderful gift of a vehicle we can't actually use, unless we have thousands of pounds spare for adaptations. OK.

You’ll be told in a moment you’re lieing 🤣

It’s possible to get any rate of PIP without submitting your own medical or other supporting evidence. A DWP appointed assessor looks at all claims and provides an assessment report to the case manager responsible for the decision. If there isn’t enough evidence in the claim form itself for an award decision, they will obtain what they need either by making further enquiries with the healthcare contacts named on the claim form, or by contacting the claimant by phone, video call or inviting for face to face assessment where necessary.

I used to advise claimants to obtain as much evidence as they could to send in with the claim because without it you do run the risk of the claim being decided solely on the assessors’ report.

You blamed the lack of funding via Motability on PIP fraud. The tax payer doesn’t support Motability - it’s a charity, so the level of fraud or otherwise isn’;t relevant to what Motability can support. £75.75 isn’t a lot of money when you consider what you’re actually getting is the virtually care free use of a car, and I don’t think it’s feasible to expect Motability to cover the costs of adaptations as well as providing the vehicle, insurance and maintenance costs.

And yes, I think disabled people, myself included, absolutely should be grateful that Motability was established and has the buying power to ensure that the majority of disabled people who qualify can choose to stay mobile and have a new vehicle every few years, with relatively little upfront cost. For most, it’s the only way they can stay mobile, and as has been mentioned upthread, for those who have significant adaptation/advance payment costs, in certain circumstances Motability can help with that cost. The mobility allowance would need to be significantly higher to finance free adaptations for all, and just cracking down on fraud absolutely wouldn’t achieve that.

I wouldn’t go as far as to say they’re lying. What I would say about the claimant, and those who behave similarly, is that if they genuinely are openly bragging about defrauding the system then they are leaving themselves wide open to being reported and done for benefit fraud. I have difficulty in believing that anyone could or would be that stupid in this day and age.

People say things for many reasons - doesn’t always mean they’re true. Ive known people say these things from bravado because they don’t want to admit to actually having a disability. I really don’t see the point of this kind of bragging, because inevitably someone will report you. But the fact remains, that if she has been investigated you wouldn’t know. And if she has been investigated and nothing’s changed she’s either a very good liar, or she’s a genuine claimant. I find the willingness here to believe that DWP are so trusting that they will award benefit to anyone who asks for it, very puzzling. In over fifteen years of dealing with PIP applications, appeals, my experience is very much the opposite.

In actual fact, people with learning and cognitive difficulties are among the very people for whom DWP would offer appointeeship if they were not able to manage their own claims. They offer the service to vulnerable people so that they have an extra layer of protection.

No I didn't.

It's not a free car, though. We lose half our PIP to pay for it. And they still aren't suitable without investing thousands into something you can't keep. If you think that's fair to disabled people that's eeally odd. Literally every other disabled person I know has the same opinion.