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?

Because people who are assessed face to face are only half as likely to be approved. That’s a huge difference and indicates that face to face assessments are more stringent.

People who take it to tribunal are more likely to have a stronger case than those who don’t.

The best way to save money would be to stop encouraging decision makers to refuse claims or artificially lower them and therefore the enormous cost of appeals (which more people win than lose) would be slashed.

My DD had to go to appeal. The wait was a year, there was 18 rooms doing 6/7 appeals a day. Each room had a lawyer and a Dr, and many had a welfare rights specialist, on the panel. The DWP sent representatives to many of the appeals.
my DD didn’t even get in the room, as soon as they looked at her papers (4 separate consultants, her specialist nurse and the pain management clinic had all included things in her application) she was granted HRC and HRM. The lawyer was incredibly angry that she’d been put through it and apologised profusely.

The cost of the appeals is something regularly hidden in discussions about costs. As is the fact very few people would keep their jobs if they made as many errors as the DWP do when it comes to benefits.

No it does not indicate that at all.
All an assessment is, is fact gathering. The person doing the assessment does not decide if the claimant gets PIP or not. They write a report and someone else decides.

Similar here. I don't think my assessor deliberately falsified the report, but there were inaccuracies in the report such as saying I didn't have problems which she hadn't asked about.

She was a physiotherapist and spent a large part of the assessment on mobility difficulties and allergic conditions - neither of which were the reason I couldn't work but were, I guess, more in her area of expertise. 🙄

Sorry you & your son went through this.

Look up the number of people who win their appeal despite adding no extra or new information.

The cost of unnecessary appeals is one of the biggest scandals in the benefit bill.

No it doesn’t at all.

It suggests that the people not assessed face-to-face have stronger applications.

Possibly.

But equally, as a pp pointed out, people who don't have a f2f assessment are likely to be more unwell &/or have better evidence.

At my last review I wrote around 10,000 words & had 13 pages of medical evidence from multiple specialist. Not sure how a one off conversation with an HCP who has to ask set questions and might not even have experience with my conditions would be more rigorous!?!

Some of them have stronger claims, but I doubt its twice as many as those assessed face to face.

I don’t understand the importance of face to face assessments, are we assuming claimants are lying about their conditions? A return to paper based would be more efficient, but there needs to be a focus on medical evidence. I think if there is no medical evidence available the claim should be disallowed. The government don’t have a clue though and what’s important to them is increasing cruelty so we’ll see

The DWP very rarely send anyone to represent their case at tribunals anyway.

I've never had a DWP person turn up at a PIP appeal, and only a couple of times at work capability appeals, and once at an overpayment appeal.

It's not uncommon for them to realise they have no chance of winning, and concede the appeal the day before the tribunal. What a waste of time and money that is!

Basing their decision (at least partially) on the report.

some assessors have no idea about certain conditions, I think specific conditions should be ‘routed’ to the relevant health professional, I.e mental health nurse for a mental health case.

Where are you pulling all the medically qualified assessors from OP?

Will you still award hugely profit making contracts to private companies to administer this…take 100s of millions from public spending just to administer?

The reports can be ridiculous though. My husband's assessor reported that my husband only had paranoid schizophrenia 2 days a week.

There you go. Have look at her X account, she says it almost weekly.

Wow. That does sound ridiculous.

I don’t have X but the report you linked was enough.
If she said people have been given cars because they have acne then that was disgraceful of her.

Some describe the state pension as a benefit.

People that live abroad & claim, are not seen on a one to one basis

I challenged a PIP decision for a client and when I got all the paperwork DWP submitted and went through the assessor's report, it said that the client was able to get up the two steps to her front door.

I was a bit surprised to see this, as I had been told that the client was a wheelchair user. I spoke to her support worker, who told me that she had a ramp up to her door and that there weren't any steps, and provided a photograph of the house with the ramp.

I sent it in with a couple of other bits of additional evidence and the DWP conceded within days. The assessment had been done over the phone, as it was during lockdown, and the assessor had just made it up.

Yes everyone on benefits should be assesed face to face.

Why? It hasn't saved money

I don’t think you understand that people who don’t have face to face assessments for PIP are the type who are least likely to be lying or exaggerating.

I am one of those who was given the highest rates of PIP long term / ongoing with no assessment. They literally used what I put on my form and the evidence of my 5 specialists - rheumatology, urology, endocrinology, oral health specialists and gastroenterology etc etc. I have very complex and rare health issues- lupus, Addisons (which can be fatal if not managed correctly and is so rare only 1 in 100,000 people have it), asthma, Sjogrens, pituitary issues, hypothyroidism and so on. My conditions are degenerative and will not improve. I cannot take the medications many with lupus take because they impact on my other conditions - I’ve tried so many now. Would you rather the government pays more to assess someone like me personally? To cause me stress when my life is already stressful enough?

You have absolutely no idea how the system really works and have just obviously been listening to the vitriol directed at disabled people at the moment.

Everyone should have to cash a giro too. That's solve the people claiming and not living in the UK any more.

Sadly the post office in the community is long gone. Which is a shame as it was a vital part of the community.

I meant to include any benefits not just pip