PIP Adjournment

Peter wrote: We go to the adjourned PIP tribunal armed with much more evidence than we had for the medical. We have had an acknowledgement that the new evidence has been recieved. Our challenge to the nil points decision would have been the poor quality of the medical assessment where we felt the evidence was not properly collected. The HP hurried through the medical typing slowly, offering little or no eye contact and repeatedly saying that she had no bearing on the decision. Hers was a 'Nothing to do with me,Guv' attitude. This was very disconcerting as it gave us the impression that our contribution was not being taken seriously enough. We were not given any chance to qualify answers to questions, and given no response time. The decision now is whether to rely on the new evidence or pursue this line of challenge as well. Grateful for any advice.

Peter wrote: Thanks Gordon.
I am assuming that we do have a case but I am a bit confused as to why we cannot improve our chances by casting doubt the reliability of the medical. Are you saying that if the evidence is compelling enough then we dont need to ?