DWP now refusing to post out copy of PIP assessment report before Award decided?

Thanks, I take note that you say it is the claimant's right after the decision has been made but where is this right written down.

There is no point in telling the DWP that we have a right without being able to cite the relevant rule/regulation.They could turn round and say that you are only entitled to the information when it is sent out to the Tribunal if an appeal gets that far.

I have been down this road many times with the DWP in the past who always seem to turn a request on it's head by saying that they have no such instruction in their manual - leaving me to do the research to prove them wrong. 

m actin the section on pip

I wonder why they don't tell you that page 4 "harmful" will not be included in this report. Yes you can request the redacted report. I want the whole report please. It's not as if I'm asking for MP,s expenses or something! They will say they don't want to upset the client. If you believe that then you believe anything.

hi folks.

that's all well and good about burning atos maximus at the stake. but tell me whose nieve?

I read somewhere (can't remember where though) that Atos and Maximus have been around since Roman times. I also heard somewhere (can't remember where) that someone over 2,000 years ago got wind that disabled benefits where being cut by Ceaser so this kind person ( can't for the life of me remember his name) started to cure them all.

They won't send you a copy of page 4 even if it's blank because it's standard practice not to copy it.  This is because page 4 is used for any medical notes from the assessor to the DWP case manager, which may include details of a terminal illness, of which the claimant may not be aware, or any other aspect of either the medical assessment itself, or other evidence obtained, which it may not be in the best interests of the claimant to disclose to them.  ALL of the evidence, including page 4 is required by the person making the decision on the award, which is the DWP decision maker - this is based on the whole report and any other evidence.   There may also be evidence gathered directly from contacts given by the claimant on the application form, and this may contain instruction that the information is not to be disclosed to the claimant.  I do wish people wouldn't assume that there is some sinister reasoning behind this.  It's an application for benefit not an MI5 investigation!

If a claimant goes to tribunal then all of the evidence will be disclosed to the tribunal ahead of the hearing and all evidence, harmful or otherwise is considered.

Hi Pam I agree with what you say, but it still doesn't explain why the assessor in my case actually used page 4 to write a report specifically making reference to my character, honesty and integrity?

There has been one recent case where an assessor actually took to social media to criticise and make fun of claimants and in the process, divulged some of a particular claimants’ personal information.  He was sacked, but in my opinion should have been prosecuted under the data protection act.  Another case involved the sacking of an assessor who was completing medical assessment forms before she actually saw the claimants face to face – she was caught by an auditor who picked up on the fact that the times she had noted on her ‘reports’ clashed with other times she had said she was on home visits, and there were not enough hours worked in one particular day to account for what she said she had done.  A couple of assessors have also been caught out noting things that they have not seen – one noted on the assessment form that he had seen the claimant walk across the car park, when in fact that particular claimant was wheelchair bound. 

Cases of this sort aren’t commonplace although you’d be forgiven for thinking they were by the time the same examples have appeared multiple times in the media and on the Internet, but even one is too many.  There is simply no excuse for this sort of thing, but at the end of the day the DWP are not to blame – the assessment providers should be examining their recruitment policies and vetting people more stringently.

Money, bonuses and targets should have no place in the assessment process because with the best will in the world, sooner or later the incentives will take over, and that IS the fault of government – Tony Blair’s to be exact. He was warned about moving from in-house assessments to outsourcing but it still went ahead – despite the fact that at the time ATOS had been kicked off disability assessments in the US and France because of their appalling lack of judgement and bad practice.   Until the assessments are brought back in house and carried out with some understanding and compassion by properly qualified staff, this problem is bound to surface again and again. There are too many people making money off the backs of sick and disabled people – from the care sector, manufacturers and distributors of disability AIDS and equipment, to insurance companies charging outrageous premiums just because someone has a disability – and that’s just naming a few.  It needs to stop, but once you start down the slippery slope the lines get blurred.

Thanks Pam. In my case I did complain (probably not strong enough due to illness) to the DWP. It was clear from the copy that I received that the DWP had placed a 'post it' label on it which said 'This must not be copied'.

Unfortunately some idiot did - label and all! 

The DWP were pretty quick in apologising that this should not have happened (don't know whether that was because it was copied to me in error or that the report should ever have been made in the first place). They said that they would have the offending paragraphs obliterated and a copy of the amended document would be sent to me. I then received a copy of the obliterated type written report. Whether that was for my benefit or not I don't know - they could well still have the original and had a copy obliterated.

Money was definitely the problem - try taking ATOS (as it was at the time for ESA) to court without the help of legal aid!