If this is your first visit, check out the community guide. You will have to Join us or Sign in before you can post.

Having difficulties logging in or resetting your password?


Please email [email protected]

Advice on claiming PIP?

weltongirlweltongirl Posts: 1Member Listener
edited June 2018 in PIP, DLA and AA
Hi my name is jay. I work in pharmacy. I’m struggling with fibro and would like some advice on how to claim pip

Replies

  • gnmeadsgnmeads Posts: 185Member Pioneering
    Hi Jay welcome to the Scope community and sorry to hear about your disability.  This link tells you how to make a claim:https://www.gov.uk/pip/how-to-claim
  • YadnadYadnad Posts: 2,862Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    I hope it goes well for you. 
  • aaronw3440aaronw3440 Posts: 54Member Connected
    Phone the number and make sure you have specialist letters and doctors letters because the assessor is more than likely to lie through their back side to make sure you get turned down ignore the guideines of them saying not to pay fees for evidence as they'l get it if it's needed because they simply won' get the evidence or even contact your GP or any other professional you see I got turned down because the assessor lied and DWP didn't bother getting the evidence or contacting the GP so now I've gotta go through the reconsideration/appeal process and had to send my doctor and therapist letters to prove how severe it is not sure if they' even take the new evidence into consideration but was worth trying 
  • markyboymarkyboy Posts: 374Member Pioneering
    In my experience the Dwp take little notice of GP letters they always say the doctor can only write down what you tell him especially in the case of how far you can walk
  • aaronw3440aaronw3440 Posts: 54Member Connected
    markyboy said:
    In my experience the Dwp take little notice of GP letters they always say the doctor can only write down what you tell him especially in the case of how far you can walk
    Actually no because you can't tell them what to write also when you have a doctor' letter it confirms there' something wrong and confirms what medication you'e on which they don'  just give to anyone as Well as you'e diagnosis also if they suspect nothing is wrong they'l refer you to a specialist that specialises in it to run tests and make a correct diagnosis and if they took little notice then they wouldn' put it in their guidelines of what evidence to actually send even though the doctors letter won't have a decision made on just that it still gets made part of evidence to support the claim along with specialist letters to prove it  and family statements that see how you are daily even on your bad days are a big help since dwp are trying to get a picture of how your condition affects you 
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,579Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    In most cases a diagnosis and the consequent symptoms are not in dispute so a GP letter won’t assist. 52% of claims succeed with no medical evidence. PIP are assessing the functional consequences of impairment not whether you have one or how bad it is. To be clear though there is no onus on DWP to contact anyone. You’re the claimant so the onus is on you to provide evidence in support of the claim.
  • Pippa_ScopePippa_Scope Posts: 5,856Member Disability Gamechanger
    Welcome to the community, @weltongirl. You may also like to take a look at Scope's information on PIP, if you haven't already. All the best with your application, and do come back to us with any questions you may have.
  • YadnadYadnad Posts: 2,862Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    In the December 2014 review of PIP the following was reported:

    2. The Review saw at first-hand during site visits that the assessment providers have a thorough process for attempting to gather further evidence, making telephone calls and writing to a range of health and social care professionals as advised by claimants.

    8. Under Disability Living Allowance (DLA), individual claimants tended to gather and submit further evidence themselves. The Review understands the intention under PIP was to shift the onus of responsibility to the assessment provider.

    Mike, I would agree that the most practical and certain way of getting a decent award is by the claimant providing all of the evidence, but PIP was not geared up for that to happen.
    DLA was a haphazard system that saw those who could afford to pay for good quality evidence succeed in getting an award whereas those that had little money and thus no means of securing the evidence were at the other end of the scale with no award. Likewise those who were able to secure by way of fees paid for professional support generally had a better outcome.

    I also appreciate that PIP is all about impact, but some evidence to support those claims does need to be sent in.
    We seem to have been sleepwalking into this scenario that the claimant is now expected to supply the evidence when it was never to be the case.
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    I am sure its the same as esa. All supporting evidence was completely ignored.
    Best advice: resign to having to go down the appeal route.
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    On pip thats what i am having to do. Again as with esa. 
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,579Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    Yadnad said:
    In the December 2014 review of PIP the following was reported:

    2. The Review saw at first-hand during site visits that the assessment providers have a thorough process for attempting to gather further evidence, making telephone calls and writing to a range of health and social care professionals as advised by claimants.

    8. Under Disability Living Allowance (DLA), individual claimants tended to gather and submit further evidence themselves. The Review understands the intention under PIP was to shift the onus of responsibility to the assessment provider.

    Mike, I would agree that the most practical and certain way of getting a decent award is by the claimant providing all of the evidence, but PIP was not geared up for that to happen.
    DLA was a haphazard system that saw those who could afford to pay for good quality evidence succeed in getting an award whereas those that had little money and thus no means of securing the evidence were at the other end of the scale with no award. Likewise those who were able to secure by way of fees paid for professional support generally had a better outcome.

    I also appreciate that PIP is all about impact, but some evidence to support those claims does need to be sent in.
    We seem to have been sleepwalking into this scenario that the claimant is now expected to supply the evidence when it was never to be the case.
    All of which kind of explains why the review was ineffective.

    1) They may have a “thorough process” but it’s only ever been intended for use in a limited number of cases e.g. severe mental ill health.

    2) DWP told the review that was the intent but they were talking nonsense. Let’s not forget they recently told a court about the original intent around the mobility descriptors and the court damningly concluded there was literally no evidence r for the statement. Government in recent years has become very good at perpetuating the idea that if you repeat nonsense often enough it becomes true.

    3) Whatever the alleged intent the law has always been written in expectation of the party seeking to get a new decision bring the party upon which the burden of proof falls. Start with this as an example.

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111532072/regulation/8

    Equivalent DLA was worded near identically. Thus nothing has changed. 
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    Its all just a pathetic farce with no other intention than to outcaste and bury the disabled. Starting with the mentally disabled as they the ones who may 'appear normal'.
    Sadly even ppl with ms and in wheel chairs are taking thier own lives out of desperation due to the acts of the dwp.  
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    This just in re pip
    Appeal numbers have gone up from 112,000 in 2014-15 to 157,000 in the year to the end of March 2016. But the president has warned that provisional figures for 2017 ‘indicate much larger increases’.
    The tribunal body to not have the staff to cope.
  • YadnadYadnad Posts: 2,862Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    edited June 2018
    Yadnad said:
    In the December 2014 review of PIP the following was reported:

    2. The Review saw at first-hand during site visits that the assessment providers have a thorough process for attempting to gather further evidence, making telephone calls and writing to a range of health and social care professionals as advised by claimants.

    8. Under Disability Living Allowance (DLA), individual claimants tended to gather and submit further evidence themselves. The Review understands the intention under PIP was to shift the onus of responsibility to the assessment provider.

    Mike, I would agree that the most practical and certain way of getting a decent award is by the claimant providing all of the evidence, but PIP was not geared up for that to happen.
    DLA was a haphazard system that saw those who could afford to pay for good quality evidence succeed in getting an award whereas those that had little money and thus no means of securing the evidence were at the other end of the scale with no award. Likewise those who were able to secure by way of fees paid for professional support generally had a better outcome.

    I also appreciate that PIP is all about impact, but some evidence to support those claims does need to be sent in.
    We seem to have been sleepwalking into this scenario that the claimant is now expected to supply the evidence when it was never to be the case.
    All of which kind of explains why the review was ineffective.

    1) They may have a “thorough process” but it’s only ever been intended for use in a limited number of cases e.g. severe mental ill health.

    2) DWP told the review that was the intent but they were talking nonsense. Let’s not forget they recently told a court about the original intent around the mobility descriptors and the court damningly concluded there was literally no evidence r for the statement. Government in recent years has become very good at perpetuating the idea that if you repeat nonsense often enough it becomes true.

    3) Whatever the alleged intent the law has always been written in expectation of the party seeking to get a new decision bring the party upon which the burden of proof falls. Start with this as an example.

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111532072/regulation/8

    Equivalent DLA was worded near identically. Thus nothing has changed. 

    The terms embodied in Regulation 8 also appear in all other legislation also including Pension Credit.

    This particular regulation clearly is used where the DWP require the claimant to reply to/supply/give evidence. Failure to comply within the 30 day period will normally result in the Suspension and eventual Termination of either the claim or the award - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/607742/suspension-termination-guide.pdf.

    Nowhere in any of the regulations does it state that the claimant is required otherwise. There has to be a specific request made under regulation 8 by the DWP.

    I value your vast experience but for the life of me I cannot find any stipulation that the claimant has to carry the burden of proof.

    I made reference to this in my claims/reviews as it is clear to me that from the terms given in the 1st review the DWP are charged with the responsibility of obtaining the evidence. Yes if further evidence is required by the DWP and they believe that the claimant has it in his/her power to provide it then and only then can they invoke Reg 8.

    Secondly, I cannot also find that the 'thorough process' only applies to cases involving severe mental health. Yes there is the option available to the DWP in those cases to be more lenient as regards submission of the PIP2 for those deemed to be vulnerable. It clearly states that the whole process of claiming PIP will go through that process, and not just the few cases.

    Even if it did it still does not explain to me why having been found to fit the categories of vulnerability as per the PIP1 no extra or additional service was provided by the DWP. I qualified and submitted evidence to prove that I have a brain injury that has changed my personality, memory and  rational thinking. and also suffer from PTSD (proved by the IIDB life award & DWP medical report)
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,579Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    Reg 8 was just an example. To answer your specific concerns then...

    1) The ascription of the burden of proof derives from a common law principle that it is always on the person who brings a claim in a dispute. It is often associated with the Latin phrase “semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit.” There is, not to put too fine a point on it, a veritable tonne of case law stretching back to 1966 backing exactly that principle again and again. 

    This is useful to know because whilst it explains why there is no obligation at all on the DWP to go out of their way to contact your GP or consultant etc. it also means that if they choose to initiate certain reviews then the onus is on DWP to show grounds for revision or supersession. Thus one of my favourite general principles; that a new medical opinion is not in itself a guarantee that anything has changed. Something both sides would do well to better understand. 

    That the first review failed to get to grips with this most basic and long-standing principle speaks for itself I think.

    2) Paragraph 1.4.1 gives you DWP guidance to providers on when they should pro-actively seek further evidence.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-assessment-guide-for-assessment-providers/pip-assessment-guide-part-1-the-assessment-process#further-evidence-needed

    As you’ll read, it’s rather limited once you take 1) into account. 

    General rule of thumb might be clumsily summarised as the burden of proof falls on the claimant unless there’s insufficient there to draw any conclusion and it becomes apparent that the nature of the claimant means they could not be expected to go further.

    Hope that clarifies it.
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    It really doesnt matter. Dwp ignores all and most certainly do not make any enquiries re burden of proof. 
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,579Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    There’s nothing to enquire about as such. On a claim the burden of proof is always on the claimant.
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    Got back my pip refusal letter to day. No surprise it was a mix of blatant lies and a total disregard of my condition. I even had a witness who is a finance professional from my housing association. It highlights a few things but for me the main is that the dwp/atos are above the law. I tried making a formal complaint but i couldnt. Have to wait 5 days for them to call me. Its disgusting. If this was any other european country there would probably be a revolt or riots if their disabled were treated in this manner. We just roll over and ask them to stab us again. 
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,579Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    I am confused. Your earlier post says you were going down the PIP appeal route but now you’ve only just received the decision? 

    I’m also not sure how you think DWP and IAS are above the law. If that were the case there would be no process for challenging either. 

    I presume your complaint was about the assessment rather than the decision but I can’t see why you couldn’t make a complaint either. It all seems a tad garbled.
  • DingbatDingbat Posts: 19Member Connected
    This discussion seems to have gone a bit off piste. All Weltongirl asked was how she could go about claiming PIP.  Seems to be a bit far from the original query and escalating in to something completely different!
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,579Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    Not sure it has. It’s a discussion about who needs to provide what evidence. That’s pretty central to making a claim and understanding that could well be the difference between success and failure.
  • DingbatDingbat Posts: 19Member Connected
    Sorry @mikehughescq  was more directed at Pip regarding her post.  Should have put @pip.
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    Dingbat
    this is a thread i begun re petition to take dwp to court of human rights
  • mikehughescqmikehughescq Posts: 3,579Member - under moderation Disability Gamechanger
    It doesn’t appear to be.
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    @mikehughescq my original post was not who the onus is on. 
    It seems to be that it doesnt matter. Dwp never made an effort to contact any my healthcare ppl. 
    If you provide the evidence dwp ignore it anyway so its a pointless farce. 
  • DingbatDingbat Posts: 19Member Connected
    pjp said:
    Dingbat
    this is a thread i begun re petition to take dwp to court of human rights

    Well, sorry but the header is from Weltongirl asking for advice on claiming PIP.  Perhaps you have written on the wrong thread?  However, if you have changed your name from Weltongirl to Pip then I apologise and let you continue with your petition. 

  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    @mikehughescq
    No im going through appeal stage with esa.
    Pip im at mandatory reassesment stage. Just waiting for the automatic refusal for that now before going to the appeal stage as well. 
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    To all who remember original post re petition to take dwp to court of human rights. I have spken to CAB and they have given me the name of an organisation to speak with who may help. Will keep posted. 
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
    @Dingbat
    Yes sorry ive just seen header. A little confused why im being sent stuff about this thread. I had just assumed it was my original post. 
  • DingbatDingbat Posts: 19Member Connected
    @pip No problem it happens - hope you are successful in your petition. :)
  • pjppjp Posts: 55Member Courageous
Sign in or join us to comment.