MY PIP ASSESSMENT YESTERDAY

[BENNYBHOY448]

1st post NEWBIE....................

Went to yet another one of these farcical medicals, assessment yesterday my examiner said her speciality was drug addiction so why is she assessing someone who has PTSD and heart disease with diabetis, severe depression, agraphobia and double hernia that makes me look 8 month preggers with twins. Tbh i don't feel confident of keeping my pip bad vibes coming from the examiner. Now have to wait 6 to 8 weeks along with the stress to see the out come. Tbh lets be serious here these assessments are an utter joke and a waste of money. Been seeing doctors, consultants, psychiatrists for years in and out of hospitals all round the uk yet i have to sit while she asks me stupid questions about how i can't touch my toes eh. She asked me can i slice a carrot with a knife - i said i don't have to i buy them sliced and she asked why i said so i don't have to slice them. Then she goes mad keyboard warrior typing in my answer. How is this person qualified to make a big decision over specialised consultants and gp's the system is all wrong there making peoples illnesses worse. There looking for any excuse to not qualify you. For people going for their assessment especially if it's your first read the advice on this thread and follow it as these so called examiners are not interested in your illnesses there just waiting for you to trip yourself up so don't let it happen. Yesterday my intelligence was insulted and i am still foaming at the mouth. I can see a long fight ahead..

[HuwieHex]

I do hope that you feel a lot better after your diatribe. Your hospital Doctors are there to help manage your medical conditions. They are not there to determine your eligibility for benefits. I do agree that the assessment process is far from perfect but the alternative would seem to be to pay all claimants regardless. Which would result in massive increases in taxation.

[undine in reply to HuwieHex]

I think you will find HuwieHex that the idea that paying all claimants will result in a massive increase in taxes is just not true and is propaganda put out by the government to support their philistine nasty policy. The actual figures by the departments own accounts before the government cut backs was that approximately .02% of all claimants were suspect possibly fraudulent and that thus the amount of money lost through false claims was negligible in respect of total monies paid out. If the government was really concerned about rooting out any fraudulent claims the sensible thing to do would surely have been to increase the number of DWP officers that were trained to seek out fraudulent claims, but instead what this government has done in line with its own ideology (and not to do with saving money) is treat all disabled as if they are going to make a fraudulent claim and then paying millions of tax payers money (which could have gone to legitimate claimants ) to a private for profit firm with clauses that make them more money for the number of claims they refuse - and who pays for the appeals - we do(the tax payer you are so worried about) not the private companies who are laughing all the way to the bank. This handing over of public money to private firms is what this government is all about in the NHS, in railways, in building contracts etc. where the private companies take huge profits out of our tax payers money and even raid pension funds whilst paying themselves huge payments and dividends as we have recently seen. So I am sorry i cannot accept your apologist reasoning that the current system whilst 'far from perfect' is the only alternative ...... it is not - pity the government did not put so much energy into chasing up the tax haven frauds but then those are their rich chums aren't they...........

[HuwieHex in reply to undine]

You are totally missing the point. I was not referring to the incidence of fraud, but to the need for examinations to determine eligibility. You seem to think that every claimant should be paid regardless. And most of your arguments are, at best, tendentious.

[undine in reply to HuwieHex]

I do not think my arguments are promoting a controversial point of view but I leave that to others to decide. The old system as far as I am aware relied on medical opinion as far as eligibility was concerned with most of the decisions being relatively straight forward the only ones that were difficult to verify were things like back pain which was difficult to 'prove' if no physical cause could be found so the decision usually went to the side of the patient in that whilst not proven they were not seen to be outright liars. Of course in any system there will always be people who take advantage of the system but quite often they were easily found out - I am certainly old enough to remember film of people purporting to have bad backs being filmed either dancing or doing manual work etc. but again I reiterate that the percentage of cheats was very low. As we are obviously not going to agree on this I think that we will have to 'agree to disagree' as they say.

[Sillysausage234]

They are laughable,I had a pip one 12 months ago by a nurse,who said I walked to the lift and then 10 meters to her office without aid, i think maybe I should of requested a piggy back,how else was I supposed to get there,anyway this opened the door for nil point,I did appeal and got an award, I had an esa one a couple of weeks ago with a dr this time and he wrapped the thing up after 10 mins and told me ide more than satisfied the criteria there and then ,so as the pip claim took that long it is up for review again. Good luck with yours anyway,I would much rather sit with the tribunal for an informal chin wag at least there’s one panel member who knows what it’s like to be unable to work and earn a living wage due to illness,and the dr s don’t like to disagree with any specialist reports.

[Sillysausage234 in reply to Sillysausage234]

Ps I know benefits are a sore subject but the years I was earning and paying taxes I did not mind 1 bit making sure people with disabilities and elderly people were warm fed and watered.

[Badbessie]

I have just completed my wife's pip form. Contained within that where assessments by he pain management team on her general abilities to proform day to day tasks. Physiotherapy, occupational therapy etc. Also contained within the document where copies of letters from a pain consultant and rheumatologist stating her range of movements in her back and joints. It is evidence that they cannot ignore. I growing number of people are now being granted PIP based on the evidence presented with the form. My advice to anyone thinking of claiming is to gather your evidence first then claim. Remember you can only use the evidence in your claim if you go to tribunal.

[Offcut]

I had a home visit for my PIP claim and got Enhanced on both parts. However the ESA was a nightmare back in 2012 I applied but it was a total of 13 months of fighting them and the HMRC then going to a Tribunal before I was awarded it. It was mentioned on the news the last few days that things like PTSD Etc. Were not taken into effect but they have now and they have got to review many 1000's again to see if they would of won their claim.

Hope it all goes well.

Be well

[hypercat54]

Hi how awful for you. The point is though that these people are not really medically assessing you, they are just form fillers and asking questions that fit a specific criteria. If you answer in the correct way you get points, if not then you don't. It's a simple as that.

The system isn't fit for purpose but it is designed to get as many ill people off benefits as possible. I wish you luck in your results. x

[hopetorun]

I am sorry that the system is so frustrating for people who clearly have problems. Ihope you can relax and just concentrate on keeping yourself well

I hope you get the outcome you need.

[footyfan]

I act as an appointee for a sibling with LD, I made the call when asked to re applying for PIP, when the form arrived they had my name on it as claimant, but her National Insurance number. When I phoned them they were adamant that I had quoted an incorrect National insurance number as according to them that number relates to me! They sent me another form which I returned. When I phoned yesterday to check they had received it again they kept saying her name didn't corresponding to the national insurance number, I had to very slowly and clearly explain they had made a clerical error!!

If they can't even get that right or correct their clerical error then what confidence can I have in the rest of the procedure???

[Patchpoppy2]

I totally agree. Was told bronchiectasis not diagnosed, even though been diagnosed for 18 years. Was told was watched walking around, but was told by assessor they only did for heart attack/ stroke claimants. I have multiple issues, asthma, epilepsy, gastric reflux, panic attacks , depression, but was told I was not I'll. Take 20 tablets daily and unfit for work. Now going to tribunal for 2nd time. Why should someone who doesn't know me, be allowed to determine my life..have contributed to this country for 33 yrs, never been unemployed. Makes my blood boil.