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?

So still haven’t explained why seeing people in person would allow assessors to KNOW that the person isn’t that disabled afterall.

Do you think all disabilities are visible?
How do you explain that 64% of people appealing to tribunal win despite not having enough face to face appointments??

Ohhhhh. I recognise this poster.

Namechanges a lot, but is a serial starter of threads suggesting grand "solutions" to things he knows fuck all about – many of which aren't problems in the first place.

Is evidence from a medical professional insufficient to determine whether support is warranted? My dm had lung cancer and COPD and was awarded attendance allowance. Is it necessary to pop over and see her attached to the oxygen tank to verify the claim or would a photo suffice?

They don’t.

the state system for assessing disability swings backwards and forwards between two extremes.

extreme 1 is an in person assessment of everyone. This lasts for a bit and then someone points out that having an in person assessment of someone in a car accident who lost both legs thirty years ago is pointless and the state could save money by not doing the assessment because his legs won’t have grown back.

extreme 2 is lifetime awards (which you used to get under DLA which was the benefit PIP replaced)
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/sick-or-disabled-people-and-carers/pip/before-claiming/if-you-get-dla/
plus paper based assessments, some phone calls and a few in person ones.
then someone points out (as you are doing now) that surely there aren’t that many disabled people and some conditions are variable and people recover from others so everyone should be assessed in person as it’ll clearly save money.

in practice some people are clearly never going to recover (legs don’t grow back and people with terminal cancer die) while others do recover and get better.

somewhere between the two is probably the truth.

but in person 1:1 assessments are so expensive to put into place they are unlikely to save money. Especially if you want medically qualified people to do them.

How to tell me you've never tried to claim PIP without telling me you've never tried to claim PIP.

Let me tell you a little story....
My 18 year old DS has been claiming DLA since he was 5. He's got PDA autism/learning difficulties/complex challenging behaviours/CVI (it's a vision thing). In essence he's an 18 year old with the cognitive abilities of a 5 year old.

Thankfully DLA doesn't involve face-face assessments but it does involve a fuckton of paperwork. He's always been high rate care. So when it came to claiming PIP on his behalf (I have deputyship) I filled in all the forms, sent off the usual reams of paperwork and they insisted on a face-face assessment. Despite me saying (and evidencing) that he doesn't engage with unknown people very well. As a result of that assessment they decided he was magically a normal 18 year old without needs. He got 2 points. So we went all the way to tribunal where the only thing he said to the judge was to call him a c*t and to tell him to go and f*k himself. Unsurprisingly we were awarded both enhanced care and mobility PIP.

Are you seriously telling me you think we should have to go through that every time he needs reassessing just incase we might be scamming the system. God help the tribunal judge who gets to meet my DS next time.......

The fact that people with complex/significant disabilities are more likely to use paper based assessments - and are more likely to be eligible for them -does not explain why spending on benefits has risen so much since the shift away from face-to-face assessments for all claimants.

Are you getting any support with the forms?

@Amazonjaunt you know the current government has found an excellent way to reduce costs fir PIP and tge waiting time for assessment and reassessment.
Theyve UNILATERALLY increased the length of some awards. Without a reassessment. Just in the ground that the person is unlikely to get better anyway.

I feel that’s a very good way to do things. If you’re struggling because you are an amputee, have MS or are schizophrenic, it would be surprising your daily struggles are going to just vanish.

Maybe because we had that mass disabling event 6 years ago? Maybe it's because there are more people on the planet generally? Maybe it's because the nhs is failing people and they're becoming disabled waiting on waiting lists for years?

Still waiting for your evidence based, fully researched analysis to back up these phrases you keep churning out.......

The majority of decisions are not appealed. So stating that x % of decisions are reversed at tribunal is misleading. As you’d expect most people don’t take it forward unless they think they can change the decision.

labours proposition to do more face to face is done so to reduce the PIP bill. It’s also a massive fraud prevention, not in the sense you’d normally think of but UC has a lot of criminals committing ID theft which this would help. This is also a reason why people who are never going to get better should still periodically be reviewed. Although I’d agree they shouldn’t need to be dragged in for physical assessment repeatedly.

You’ve got the wrong person.

Maybe you could be more productive and think about how to make the country more productive.

Increased productivity and a growing economy is what is needed. It always has been the answer and always will be. The country has been in the economic doldrums since the crash of 2008, when Labour were last in power. Covid and Brexit have compounded matters.

Can you give us numbers on how much it has increased?
And then explain why that increase is wrong - seeing budgets are increasing every year, not the least due to inflation.

Is this applicable for child benefit too?

Yes thanks
Hopefully it will be a smooth transition from DLA.

The poster appears to be correct in identifying that you know very little about what you’re talking about. Still waiting for the data re cost savings. ..

The rise in benefit claims isn’t what your thread was about, but actually the reasons for that are multi-faceted. Not being F2F isn’t the reason. For example, there are more people surviving medical events they wouldn’t previously have survived. The cost of living crisis means more people who wouldn’t previously have claimed despite meeting the criteria because they didn’t need the money. The raising as SPA means more PIP claims because it raises the top age for PIP.

Bring them along to a face to face meeting. You cannot trust paper documents like birth certificates.

I doubt we will get any answers that don't consist of throwaway phrases or assumptions that have no basis of actual proof. I'm still waiting, myself, for all this information to back up OPs claims of saving so much money. Obviously as OP is such a fiscal and socially aware genius who has single handedly found the solution to the welfare benefits system when so, so, so many governments, think tanks and other, obviously, lesser mortals have as yet failed to find, we can expect some outstanding data to come our way. I'll put the kettle on.

The DWP make the decision about who gets paper based assessments.

not the claimant.

that way it works is that you put your form and medical evidence in and then THEY decide whether they need more evidence from a phone call or an in person assessment,

so yes, the paper based ones will be more severe disabilities because DWP decide on it,

You apparently know nothing at all about PIP claims.

ALL claims begin with a paper application including medical evidence. Every single one. You are then "assessed" by some unqualified tosspot either in person or over the phone who writes an interesting pack of lies assessment
After which the DWP write to tell you there's nothing wrong with you and you can't have any money.
You then have to fill in ANOTHER form for a mandatory reconsideration which is automatically refused before you can apply for an appeal at tribunal. Where you fill in ANOTHER form explaining everything you already explained twice on paper and once in person and submit all your supplementary evidence again
Then you explain YET AGAIN to the tribunal who then, finally, award you the PIP you should have got from the original form you filled in 2 years earlier.

Very efficient

My first PIP assessor came to the house, but renewals have been done remotely as my condition is degenerative. I’m never getting better so what would be the point in seeing me every few years?

Maybe first time claimants could, mostly, be seen in person. But assessments, staff, buildings & tech all cost a fortune. I don’t know how much it could save, if anything.

But surely that statistic is because claimants who have a cut-and-dried claim aren’t assessed, whilst those who are more borderline are assessed.
Seeing all claimants face-to-face won’t halve the proportion of awards made to the people who aren’t currently seen.

Me too.....😴