higher award for personal care nil mobility

Posted , 4 users are following.

This discussion has been locked due to a period of inactivity. Start a new discussion

We went for assessment  and my wife sat in wheel chair right through the assessment---no one asked her about walking or could she stand up-it is baffling that they say she needs help with her personal needs-help standing, dressing, washing etc but can walk up to 200 meteres, The assessor was polish and my wife is partially deaf from radiation treatment, she found the lady hard to understand-it means we lose Blue badge I have written appeal but my wife is depressed, she found the assesment very stressful-I wonder if other people had top for personal but nil for mobility.

0 likes, 9 replies


9 Replies

  • Posted

    I had been on DLA (HRM & MRC) since 1995.

    Yet this year I lost the chance to claim PIP due to the DWP and they closed down my DLA. I tried to claim for Attendance Allowance (for the over 65's) but was refused that too.

    So yes, times are hard - money has to be saved - benefits must be cut back!


  • Posted

    Hi Paddy

    On the claim form did you state how far your wife can walk?

    • Posted

      Probably not. It may also be the case that the assessor based on what info had been given of the condition that they concluded that they should be able to walk that distance.

      Anyhow it does really come down to what was actually put on the claim form.

  • Posted


    I looked up the meaning of Assessor. A person who is specialised in a particular subject or matter and can advise on said subject in law , taxation or guidance.

    If the Assessor was doing their job unbiasedly it could be argued that if someone sat in a wheelchair for the full time of assessment on their condition then it would be prudent for the Assessor to query the claimants mobility criteria.

    On the other hand, if the Assessor is biased then it could be seen as, don't poke the bear.


    • Posted

      Hi Mike

      The other side of the argument is did the claimant explain their mobility restrictions on the claim form?

      If you notice at the end of the form there is a declaration where you sign to say that everything in the claim  is the truth.

      If the Claimant fails to explain then they are signing a declaration stating that they have no mobility restrictions. The fact that they turn up in a wheelchair is then irrelevant (and so is any medical evidence) and it is not up to the assessor to change the circumstances of the claimant who has signed a legally binding declaration, indeed if they did they would be open to criminal charges of fraud.

      On the other hand if the claimant has explained their mobility restriction signed the declaration and produced medical evidence the assessor will then take the wheelchair into consideration. The reasons for this is pretty obvious as any Tom Dick or Harry could turn up in a wheelchair and get awarded enhanced mobility if that was the only qualifying element.

      Claimants need to understand that they MUST explain how their condition affects them it is NOT the assessors job to do it for them.

  • Posted

    Hi Anthony,

    I admire your interpretation of the signed documentation as a statement of the truth. However as a large proportion of claimants state on this website that even after writing down on their claim form all the problems they face, supply evidence from gp, specialist and back it up with their signatures on a legally binding contract, they are still awarded less benefit than they are entitled too.

    Therefore the dwp must see the majority of claimants as cheats and liars but cannot be bothered to take them all to court for fraudulent claims.

    Surely the assessors report must also be legally binding, even if they do fill in some of the report before you even turn up at the assessment centre.


    • Posted

      Can I step in here please.

      Anthony has given a precise explanation of either scenario.

      However I would add that completing the form fully and backing the difficulties faced with good evidence is not the end of the matter. For those claimants that you quote, I would suggest that despite giving chapter and verse it is still not enough.

      When describing the difficulties and needs you should also be identifying which descriptor you are relying on and telling the DWP why and the justification for doing so.

      So the claim from is a 4 part document.

      1. Explain the condition and have it confirmed with evidence

      2. Describe the difficulties and needs in detail

      3. Describe how and why that detailed information fits the various

          descriptors you are relying on.

      4. Provide evidence that what you describe and why that descriptor fits.

      As Anthony says, if you don't complete parts 3&4 then no matter what you say at the assessment, or what additional evidence you provide it will not be used simply because it is the claimant's responsibility to claim the descriptors you are relying explaining why. 

      The assessor and the DWP will only go on what you claim - it's not there job to fill in the gaps in the claim form - if you don't claim properly then you won't get the proper result.

    • Posted

      Hi Mike

      I'm not sure about your claim that a 'large' proportion of claimants state they have explained their condition. Most fall into the trap of believing the medical evidence is enough and fail to explain in detail how their condition affects them. I saw this time and again when working as a volunteer at the CAB and suspect many of those on this forum have done the same. One honest poster yesterday put her hands up and admitted it.

      I will state this from experience fill the form in correctly then refer to medical evidence and link it with a descriptor and every time you will score points. There is of course then a problem of scoring enough points to reach the threshold where benefit is paid.

      Of course there is also the creditability test. Someone can describe how their disability affects them but the medical evidence doesn’t reflect this. A condition such as cancer for example can come in many forms and its effects can be terminal to mild. For example you can have prostate cancer which requires only monitoring and its affects are minimal. It would be unreasonable for a claimant in such circumstances to state they need 24 hour care and can’t walk more than 20m.

      Look at it from the DWP point of view. There is a form which clearly and unmistakably asks a claimant to describe how their condition affects them. A claimant fails to fill this part in, just what are they supposed to do guess?

      If that was the case the system would soon bankrupt the country as just about anyone with any kind of medical evidence could claim non-means tested/taxable income from PIP alone.

      It is true that some of the assessors are part of the problem but it would be ignoring the elephant in the room if we didn’t also address the mistakes claimants make.


Join this discussion or start a new one?

New discussion

Report as inappropriate

Thanks for your help!

We want the forums to be a useful resource for our users but it is important to remember that the forums are not moderated or reviewed by doctors and so you should not rely on opinions or advice given by other users in respect of any healthcare matters. Always speak to your doctor before acting and in cases of emergency seek appropriate medical assistance immediately. Use of the forums is subject to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and steps will be taken to remove posts identified as being in breach of those terms.

newnav-down newnav-up