What’s happening to PIP?

Feb 28, 2017

Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn

What was welfare reform supposed to achieve?

If memory serves me correctly, one of the key principles of PIP (Personal Independence Payment) was that it would be awarded to people according to their needs, not because they had a particular condition.

There would be no disabilities that automatically qualified someone to receive PIP, unlike DLA (Disability Living Allowance) which it replaced.

Instead, every claimant would be assessed, and points awarded, according to the level of difficulty they experienced with a range of daily living and mobility activities.

Leaving aside, for a moment, the demonstrable dishonesty of many such assessments, the principle seems fair. Anyone who struggles with daily living or mobility receives support, to a degree that reflects the amount of difficulty experience.

Nowhere can I recall particular disabilities being excluded from support. The idea that somebody who struggles to make a journey because they have MS, for example, is awarded PIP, while someone else who has as much difficulty with travelling is not deemed eligible, because they have dementia or PTSD, seems in direct contradiction of the way PIP was intended to work.

return to top

Tribunals have clearly come to the same conclusion.

A panel of three judges in the Upper Tribunal have ruled in favour of claimants, and against the DWP guidance to assessors.

The first tribunal said that claimants should receive more points in the “mobility” assessment if they suffer from “overwhelming psychological distress” when travelling alone. They should be scored in the same way as a person who needs assistance because they have difficulties navigating. By way of example, the first group might include some people with isolated social phobia or anxiety, whereas the second group might include some people who are blind. Until this ruling, the assessment made a distinction between these two groups, on the basis that people who cannot navigate, due to a visual or cognitive impairment, are likely to have a higher level of need, and therefore face higher costs.

A second tribunal said that there should be more points allocated in the “daily living” element for people who need help to take medication and monitor a health condition. This should be scored in the same way as needing support to manage therapy, like dialysis, undertaken at home. Until this ruling, the assessment made a distinction between these two groups, on the basis that people who need support to manage therapy of this kind are likely to have a higher level of need, and therefore face higher costs.

These are independent appeal tribunals, set up to consider awards of PIP when the claimant is not happy with the original decision or the “mandatory reconsideration” which they have to go through before bringing their case to the tribunal.

return to top

Following the tribunals’ rulings would cost more money

Rather than accepting the rulings of an independent judiciary, which look to be closely aligned with the avowed intentions of the benefit, the government has introduced emergency legislation to change the rules.

They did the sums, and realised that it would cost an extra £3.7 billion by 2022, if the 160,000 people affected were to receive the support they are entitled to.

Therefore, they are changing the mobility descriptors in such a way as to exclude people suffering from psychological distress. The daily living descriptors relating to medication and therapy are also changed, to exclude taking medication and monitoring a health condition.

The changes come into force from 16th of March

Any PIP applications considered before that date should be assessed on the current rules. However, it is expected that decision-makers will delay applications likely to be affected until after the new criteria come into force.

return to top

Lib Dem peers have now tabled a motion to defeat the government’s plans

Liberal Democrats managed to thwart the Government’s plans to restrict tax credits back in October 2015. It is to be hoped that they can pull off this attempt to deny people the help and support that they need.

Baroness Cathy Bakewell, Liberal Democrat Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, said:

The Government is using its recent losses in court as an excuse to severely restrict disability benefits. Rather than listening to the ruling they are using it to make matters worse for disabled people – that is utterly outrageous.

What makes things even worse is that they have sneaked this announcement out under the cover of by-elections. These decisions impact the lives of vulnerable people, Liberal Democrats will not allow the Conservatives to get away with treating people with disabilities with such total contempt.

return to top


4 Responses to “What’s happening to PIP?”

  1. Hazel Kennedy February 28, 2017 at 6:35 pm #

    The PIP payment is supposed to increase independence and to cover extra costs incurred by people with difficulties . You have to provide evidence of your medical condition but no evidence of what you’re having to pay out to get additional support . No one ever asks you for any receipts or invoices for equipment or services . If people can show that they are incurring extra expense because of their problems then surely this supports the assessment . This isn’t just about getting extra money

    • Frances March 1, 2017 at 11:11 am #

      An interesting take on the process of assessment, Hazel. Although I can see that producing evidence of expenses would show how much extra life can cost with a disability, I imagine many people would throw up their hands in horror at the thought of being even more rigorously assessed…

  2. Colin ritchie March 1, 2017 at 11:12 am #

    There are some people who have been assessed & have been able to hitch trailers & other implements to their car, still getting extra payment to ensure their vehicle is retained as this would ruin their livelihoods but they do have another vehicle & their disabling episode was close to 15 years ago or more with near perfect recovery. Who reviews these people? A group of consistent examiners should be appointed to eliminate discrepancies & poor reviews. Where some reviews are poorly conducted with provided support information being either outdated or based on ill-advised case notes. Some are being classed as disabled, as they have possibly a new GP who has no idea & is following out of date information, while others lose their car & are extremely disabled – but the Service user is less personally assertive.

  3. Roger Sharp April 16, 2017 at 12:43 pm #

    “Leaving aside, for a moment, the demonstrable dishonesty of many such assessments….”,

    That just about says it all. Why should it be left aside? It’s clearly going on and to a monstrous extent. Yet we allow it to be like that.What other Government function would be performed to the same standard? It’s a disgrace. And they get away with it because the know they can.

Leave a Comment or Ask a Question: