One to one benefit assessments

[Amazonjaunt]

It would save money in the long run if all benefits claims had to be assessed one to one, surely?

I agree with all of that.

Not everyone can make a new PIP claim online now. It depends where you live and whether it is the claimant themselves making the claim or their appointee, deputy, etc.

And that's an issue. Having arthritis, I struggle to hold a pen for prolonged periods and use talk to type software. It was a battle for me to be able to do it online, they don't make it obvious that this is an option.

For anyone who can’t apply online but can’t write (or just doesn’t want to write), it is fine to type on separate sheets.

I was baffled when I found out DLA forms couldn't be completed online considering how most things can be these days.

Agree, ridiculous to just decide on the basis of phone calls. Medical records should also be included. Strange how since it stopped being face to face that the number of claims has risen to epic proportions.... Time to tighten up the whole welfare system, but won't be done under Labour at least.

And how many of those denied support get it on appeal at massive extra cost?

Go read people's experiences of PIP assessments, where they get denied because they made it to the appointment.

You really ought to read the thread before posting. OP is wrong and that has been amply demonstrated. You are also wrong.

Local authorities take the personal care element of PIP into account for financial assessment.

If you remove PIP from people who don't work, the follow on effect on local authorities will be considerable.

I don't know what they can do to make the forms more accessible. Neither of my adult daughters have the skills to fill them in - poor literacy skills are one of the reasons they get PIP!

Yes, that's what I did in the end for my pip renewal. But the cost to the dwp of sending out forms, paying for postage to send them back, presumably someone has to then scan them into the system etc - this could all be avoided if the forms could be done online. They could also be electronically shared with health professionals the patient is known to, to ask them to verify the information in the form, and that professional would feel safe to do so honestly, rather than filling the paper form in and then the family sees it and may challenge them.

There could still be option for paper forms for those who do not have access to a computer, but online should be the default option.

@Bushmillsbabe the claimant/appointee would still be able to see the information professionals send even if it isn’t part of the claim form. It could only be withheld if it would be harmful for the claimant’s health, but in most cases it could be disclosed.

DWP can request factual reports from professionals for DLA/PIP now. They don’t always but it is an option open to them.

The fact they don’t always can be an issue for some people.

Our GP surgery won’t do letters or reports for DLA or PIP unless asked by the DWP, even if you want to pay they won’t. They say this is because they take a lot of time and most of the time they are ignored. That’s apparently the decision taken by most surgeries in our county.

They say they get very few requests from the DWP initially, but do get requests from appeals panels so they feel it’s a better use of their time to only do it then.

However, that can mean some people end up having to appeal because they don’t have medical history evidence to go with their application.

Whem I applied for dla for my son I sent in an application with details about the areas where he struggles beyond the capabilities of an average child of his age. I sent supporting documents on the form of letters from his neurologist, his sleep specialist, his SEN teacher at school and his medication needs. That went in a queue, when it got to he top of a queue I got a text message, an asseßor looked it over at their convenience and I received a letter 10 days later and a deposit I to my bank account.

I imagine a single assessor on say 30k could get through maybe 20 assessments in a day including completing any call to clarify information. Now if that assessor had to schedule an appointment, have access to an office to meet clients (I spoke to our assessor on the phone, it was clear she was wfh, she was a very helpful and professional lady but her dog barked at 1 point which she apologized for) and even if in an office you're talking a desk a computer and a headset to complete virtual assessments) and maybe they'd get through 8 assessments a day but then you'd have to account for the high rate of missed appointments due to dealing with a cohort of clients who are by definition ill or disabled. So maybe on average 7 a day would be completed.

This to complete the same number of assessments you'd require 3 assessors at the cost of 3x30k plus office space at the cost of say 12k a year each so your same number of assessments that cost 30k now cost 102k to complete. That's a loss of 72k a year so you'd need to be making some significant savings for it to be worth that increased cost of admin.

Unless, and I suspect this is what you mean, idealgically you would prefer that money spent on admin rather than going to those you personally see as not disabled enough

You don't think medical records are included? You think this is all just done by a chat on the phone? Have you ever seen the forms and supporting documents required for these assessments? Or the rate of people knocked back on their first application because of simple mistakes in wording? How do you think the applications are currently dealt with?

That's a manipulated statistic.

Those who have a F2F review are those who are not easily awarded or not awarded from a written application. Therefore if 81% of written applicants are approved then only 19% of overall applicants are complex enough to require f2f assessment.

Then of that 19% of total applicants 42% are still awarded. So almost half of those not initially awarded at written application ARE awarded after a F2F assessment.

That's very different than suggesting the population of applications receiving virtual and F2F assessment is the same to begin with.

Does that make sense? Or is maths beyond you?

Would it? Because the average annual award of DLA when Google is around £5600 per person.

If there's any accuracy in my numbers suggesting 30k to complete 20 assessments versus 102k to complete the save number F2F you'd need to save at least £80k to make it worth F2F assessment at a population level.

So in that case you'd need to make 16 fewer awards for 20 applicants. So you'd need to be seeing around a 75% reduction in awards.

I just don't think the numbers add up in the way your ideology suggests they do.

You gave the statistic of 70% of claims are not assessed face to face so I presumed you would comprehend my repetition of your claim and not think 70% was somehow related to a % of renewals

The fact is correct, that you’re half as likely to be awarded PIP if a face to face assessment is done, but your conclusion that this means too many people are getting PIP is unfounded. It could be the opposite- that face to face assessment by a paramedic or physiotherapist results in too few people getting PIP because the assessor has no expertise in the medical conditions they are assessing.

You are assuming that face to face assessment is superior to paper based when in all actuality it might be much worse.

Sometimes all you need is a brief letter. Sally is paralysed from the neck down. She needs 24/7 care for all her needs. She has a stoma bag and catheter. She has nurses visiting her home four times a day to change her bag, catheter, administer medication, rotate her to prevent bedsores and once a day sponge bathe her, change sheets and dress. She also has family carers to provide comfort and support. There that’s really brief. You don’t need hundreds of pages for very straightforward cases.

100% the private contractors doing these assessments make hundreds of millions of ££££ and they mostly either rubber stamp the NHS or get it very wrong and then there’s the costs of the tribunals.

It’s not at all strange. 2020 is when adult DLA recipients started to have to transition to PIP en masse and they basically had to re-apply for the benefit. The bow wave isn’t due to lack of face to face assessments, it’s due to adults being moved off DLA and on to PIP. You could say the same with housing allowance as that is also when the UC migration kicked off in earnest.

Yes, but there is brief and brief. My letter just said something like
'I reviewed this X years old lady who has a confirmed diagnosis of arthritis. She is currently stable on X dosage as shown by her recent blood test results of X. She reports pain in X and Y areas and mild swelling was noticed. She will be reviewed again in X number of months.

There was nothing about my mobility levels and the daily activities I struggle with, and my consultant hasn't to my recollection asked about these, so will be nothing in my nhs notes. No physio notes as I am a physio so I declined referral.

I am very grateful that I was awarded it, it made a huge difference to me as it allowed me to initially buy a 2nd hand car to get to work rather than struggling on public transport, and then when I got a bit worse it allowed me to drop a day and work 4 days rather than 5 - having Wednesdays off means I can much better manage my pain and fatigue levels. It's much more cost effective to the tax payers as it has enabled me to continue to work, use my extensive skills as a health professional and continue to pay tax myself. And I think that's the bit some people don't see when complaining about the PIP bill, is that in some instances it saves more than it costs.

But its concerning that my award was 90% dependent on what I wrote and said, which leaves the system open to abuse. And on the other side people who do genuinely need it to maintain their independence are loosing out because

• they don't understand how to write a good form
• the process isn't always accessible
• the process is invasive and traumatic - I started the form twice and stopped before I finally submitted. I just wasn't ready to admit to myself that I had gone from a marathon runner and mountain climber to someone who was disabled, and having to tell a stranger on a call about wiping my bottom was deeply embarrassing for me and it took me weeks to get over that.

Having seen some parents try to abuse the DLA assessment process by writing things which are untrue and trying to get me to do the same, and then when awarded not use it for basic things the child needs (like supportive footwear) whilst driving around in a top range SUV, or getting a motability vehicle which is trendy but puts their child at risk of injury rather than getting a WAV because they are 'ugly', despite being told of the risks multiple times to the extent the family was escalated to a child protection plan.
And seeing other (in my opinion very valid) claims be rejected for no clear reason leads me to believe the system isn't fit for purpose.

Yes, it doesn’t help everyone. My point though was that, while an online form for those who want to use it would be helpful, it doesn’t need an online form in order for DWP to directly approach professionals themselves.

Even if GPs or other professionals won’t write a specific letter, claimants can still submit a SAR for their notes. Obviously, it depends on needs and what input from others the claimant has had, but that can help.

It's not even that,.it's that those who receive f2f are complex cases or appeals so they have typically already been told.no by virtual assessment. So fall into the 20% not awarded virtually

DWP may have written your doctor with a form to fill out on the daily activities. They sent one to my neurologist. I never knew about that piece of evidence until I saw it in the packet for the tribunal. So you don’t necessarily know all the information that was used.

I agree on the traumatising nature of it. We adapt to a new normal and it can be distressing to have to detail our difficulties and work arounds.