PIP for Anxiety

[IntelligenceIsFree]

AIBU to clear things up?

The current nasty rhetoric around disabled people at the moment is astounding. Society needs to be reminded that we are ALL one illness or accident away from disability.

Everyone knows someone who is gaming the system, yet the PIP fraud rate is extremely low. The public demonising, does not match the reality.

The hot topic is “anxiety” and how people with “anxiety” are gaming the system, getting “free” cars and robbing tax payers; this is being constantly fed through media, news articles and so on.

This is simply not true. The people spouting this nonsense clearly have no idea how PIP works. Nobody gets PIP without strong medical evidence. Nobody.

Before anyone posts “my neighbour got PIP just by telling lies”. No, they did not. That’s not how it works.

People need to be educated properly on how benefits work, how they are awarded and what the criteria for mobility cars actually is; the cars are not in fact free.

People need to be educated on the fact that there is anxiety, which every human suffers from at some point, and then there are anxiety DISORDERS which are entirely different and can be life changing and debilitating. Hence, the need and entitlement for PIP.

Brenda down the road who feels too anxious to go to Bingo on a Friday night is NOT getting PIP ❌

Mary up the lane who has such severe OCD that she cannot leave her own home for fear that she will die, IS getting PIP .✅

There’s a huge difference.

The current turning on disabled people is shameful and we are living in a country full of hate because Bob (and his Uncle) are annoyed that they are paying tax to “support all of these scroungers”.

Bob (and his Uncle), needs to hope that they never get cancer, or suffer life changing trauma or have an unfortunate accident to avoid being served a huge scrounged humble pie.

I do not suffer from anxiety but as a human, I am pleased we have a system in society to support the most vulnerable people who need it. Life can happen to anyone.

NHS therapy often involves long wait lists and then when you finally get the therapy, they often aren't very long and it isn't enough. This is why it can be common to use PIP or DLA to top up therapy or in some cases, get therapy at all due to long wait lists.

But in the majority of cases the decision makers don’t go against the assessor unless there are glaring inconsistencies - either in their report and whatever medical evidence the claimant has provided, or enough to make the decision maker request the report be reviewed. As you said, decision makers are not medically qualified and rely on the assessors’ report, not only to assess the claimant but to interpret any independent medical evidence they have supplied.

Because they are an assessor, not a DWP advisor. They are not responsible for extensions on time limits for application. To be honest I’ve rarely heard of cases where a claimant can submit evidence to prove their condition and doesn’t do so. If they have no copies of reports of their own they would put the HCP involved with them on the application form as a contact. Why would the assessor not contact that HCP directly and ask for evidence ?

If the system dictates that where an active treatment plan is in place a paper based assessment must be attempted, rather than actually interviewing the claimant, then it’s no surprise that many claimants are wrongly awarded. It’s not the assessor or the claimant at fault, is the system within which they have to work.

Sorry, that got a bit muddled it was just in regards to one of the post you had quoted the PP wrote "You are the one assessing them!!!! So if you think people are making a fraudulent claim why are you giving them PIP? It’s on you!!" To reiterate assessors arent giving anyone anything, they are just advising the DWP what the claimant and evidence is reporting and whether its consistent, and where that restriction sits in the decriptors.

It’s also been my experience that many claimants request an MR, and if they don’t specify that they are sending in updated evidence, and send it within the time frame given, including any granted extensions, the case will go to a different decision maker, who will re-examine on exactly the same evidence as the original decision, and that decision will stand. It doesn’t go anywhere near an assessor, just to a different decision maker.

There doesn’t seem to be any appreciation of the fact that although MH conditions may not directly affect mobility in the sense of walking ability, the consideration has to be the manner in which the distance is walked and whether it can be done reliably, to a decent standard, repeatedly as often as needed, without worsening their condition, in consideration of what help is needed/appliances used during the activity and most importantly whether the claimant and those around them are safe for the duration. As you rightly say, it’s not just about how far you can walk.

I’m actually quite dumbfounded at the numbers of posters who keep going with their nonsense despite very clearly demonstrating that they don’t know the first thing about disability benefits, what they’re designed to achieve and how the strict criteria are applied. Without a command of the actual facts there is no cogent argument.

But there’s a box to tick saying extra info is coming. What is the point of that if they don’t wait for a GP request?

By the logic of the poster (who is allegedly an assessor )everybody could just wait until a week before the deadline and submit their form with zero info. Apparently assessors then just have to wave everything through- except we all know that absolutely isn’t the case.

"no, the system can't get any more money. MR should be banned."

No MR shouldn't be banned. What is needed is for all assessors to follow the regulations and not make in some cases clearly ridiculous decisions.

This is nothing to do with the application deadline. You submit a claim, it goes into a queue. That queue could be 1, 2, 3 4 months wait until a HAAS assessor open the claim and decides if they need to request GP/HCP information, at that point, there is 20 days to get the info from the GP. Nothing to do with the claimant, when they submitted, when they consented, whether they got an extension, when they upload. I talking solely of requests from pip to the GP. There is 20 days, the application date, submission date, consent date, further information date, none of that matters. Time in an assessors queue to being written, only time period that matters.

And i also said the chances of sucessful award with zero is evidence is slim, but not impossible.

Agree. I love the way posters who clearly have no clue as to how the PIP system works, or how difficult it is to get a fair decision, are advocating for taking away the only recourse a claimant has to some of the frankly ridiculous DWP decision making. Many times when supporting claimants at tribunal I’ve seen the DWP severely criticised for forcing the claimant to tribunal because the decision has not only been grossly unfair to the claimant, but wrong in the application of the law.

And I’ve lost count of the number of times where DWP stop dthe appeal process and claimants receive notification that their case will not be going forward because their case has been ‘reviewed’ and benefit awarded. It gives the distinct impression that in many cases the DWP know they have no case, and are waiting to see if the claimant will actually put themselves through the stress of an appeal. Once they realise the claimant is taking the case forward, they cave and award benefit. It’s benefit savings by the back door because in many cases claimants - particularly those with mental health conditions or learning disabilities, will put up with a lousy decision because they find the appeal process too stressful.

If we’re going to persist with a PIP assessment system that is so deeply flawed, then we’re always going to need the appeals process as a safety net - unless/until it actually dawns on somebody in government that a better system with a right and fair first time approach to the claimants instead of treating them garbage would save money all round because the tax payer would no longer be funding expensive tribunals in order to ensure fair decisions.

And i also said the chances of successful award with zero is evidence is slim, but not impossible.

I’m glad you made this point directly because it blows out of the water the POV of many posters that all you have to do is rock up for an assessment and tell the assessor any old rubbish and you’ll get an award, no questions asked.

Ds was initially denied HRM under SMI because 'there wasn't enough evidence he needed close supervision at all times.'
Evidence had been sent in that he needed a minimum of 2:1 individual support at all times in an independent specialist school and a minimum of 3:1 when out in the community due to unsafe behaviour.

The claimant is given a tick box to indicate further evidence is on the way, but to my knowledge they are not, and have never been told that there is a time limit to supplying that evidence and that after twenty days the case is progressed anyway.

Did you ask for MR and what was their excuse ?

If it doesn't cover your PIP plus your proportion of public expenditure then you are a net recipient. If it exceeds it you are a net contributor.

DWP won’t take appointment letters as evidence of anything. They will use claimant copies of consultant reporting to GP’s after clinic appointments, but often these are not supplied until well after the deadline for supplying supporting evidence has passed. Claimants can and do supply the details of those HCP’s involved in their care, so I’m a at a bit of a loss as to why an assessor would contact a family member for evidence when they have the contact details for a clinic, unless there was no other option.

I didn’t say there’s no concrete value in a consultants diagnosis.

DWP create the rules and guidance, PIP assessors work to the PIPAG. I can only share my experience and those of my colleagues.

Evidence is massively helpful such as a report from a consultant or mental health nurse and makes the award easier to justify. But it can be awarded without this and often is, dependant on the mental health condition and what the claimant says during the assessment.

Do you actually think that people need motivation to get better from conditions? That being ill or disabled is enjoyable or an excuse for pampering., and that people can just get over it if you force them? Or that the amount that people typically get from PIP is sufficient to bribe them to be ill?

I obviously object strongly to any form of fraud. but some people here seem to be going beyond concern about potential benefit fraud, and implying that even the genuinely ill or disabled would benefit from harshness and 'tough love' to 'motivate' them to recover. And sorry, but I do think that is extremely cruel.

How is that the same thing as saying there is zero fraud ? We have a PIP assessor on the thread who agrees that it’s very difficult to secure an award with no evidence to support what you’re saying. Every system can be played, so it’s unrealistic to say that there is zero fraud. One of the major elements of what PIP fraud does exist is not claimants telling lies at the initial application stage, it’s failing to report changes in their condition that would disqualify them or result in a reduction in the award.

Agree. The more this thread goes on, the more concerned l am about the level of understanding of what disability actually means. Or of how PIP works and who it is meant to benefit. PIP isn’t paid in respect of the actual disability or condition, it’s paid in respect of the impact on daily life. Where there is an expectation that someone’s condition is temporary or likely to improve, there will only be a short term award and a full review at the end of that time. I’d be really interested to know what kind of disability posters think you can ‘recover’ from.

I am a net contributor. I’m a higher rate tax payer. By some margin.

How is motivation going to make my legs work?

Exactly. The opinion that poster expressed was designed to be offensive across the whole range of disability.

The thread is titled PIP for anxiety, it's largely about the fraudulent level of PIP for self reported MH issues, not physical.

Exactly. No one would take issue with some of the disabilities cited on this thread. But the mushrooming number of claims for mental-health related issues of a minimal nature has to be addressed, or the whole ship sinks.