PIP MR letter questions

Dear fellow forum members,

- I am wondering if for my PIP MR letter under each disputed activity, when I put the correct descriptor I think I should have got, if it looks ok or maybe not, to also next to the descriptor, write down the number of points I believe I should have got.

- I hope it is ok for PIP MR purposes only (not for the stage of the appeal when mr fails) to use
. Descriptor on thinks is correct
. What error decision maker did
. List of evidence in the papers already provided to support me
- can I add additional evidence that pip decison maker did not get to see when I ask for PIP Mandatory reconsideration like GP letter, friend’s letter etc

Lastly I had a PIP paper assessment and no PA3 report. Only 2 or 3 lines from the decision maker for each descriptor maybe. It seems to be opinions of the decision maker who does not reference in details how she came to each descriptor (At times it is vague) as she did not request a health professional report. Is the right way to look at all the evidence already sent in that back up the descriptor I think I should have had.

I hope I did not get confused with MR and the stage after the appeal, and that the list of descriptor I think is correct, What descriptor I think is correct, What error from decision maker made, What evidence to support me, and any other evidence I wish to send in does not apply to appeal tribunal only but to PIP MR when another decision maker will look at my assessment again.

Many many thanks.

kind wishes

Hello Gary,

Thank you very much for your selfless help:cheer:

I rang PIP twice.
- About 2 wks ago I asked for the health professional report the PA4, they told me there was not one because the decision maker did a paper assessment and did not ask for a health professional for a report. Also I was told she did ask for my esa report from 2013! And my last pip face to face assessment report from 3 years ago.
- I rang them back a few days later, and asked for the PA3 which is done when there is a paper assessment. They told me again there was no PA3 and that the decision maker had not requested a report from a health professional and that she did not have to, because it was a PIP review only (pip.1043 form) and that she had enough evidence from what I sent her.

Do you think what they say is true?
Is it possible for a decision maker doing a PIP review, to not ask a health professional report?
I’ll call them later on today and ask again.
The tel adviser said he could see that after they had received my pip review form the decision maker had requested the esa 113 and could tell she had used the pip face to face report from 3 years ago.

Esa 113 says (I got a copy sent to me) the 113 suggests the client cannot mobilise more than 50 metres without stopping and that the Med 113 shows the client can only walk for a few yards before stopping due to pain, yet the latter is ignored by decision maker, same with gp letter of 5 years ago confirming I stop every few yards.

Yes it is very difficult to do a PIP MR when I only have 2 or 3 lines per descriptor, if that, even at times vague to justify giving me each descriptor. I do not know always know why she used a lower descriptor, what she based her decision on. But it is not impossible because I have lots of proof but the decision maker keeps ignoring a lots of evidence:
- she says “I said” was preparing a meal with difficulties when I said that on the contrary compared to 3 years ago, after a fall in the kitchen and excrutiating pain when sitting in chair to prepare food (cam impingment, need hip replacement, paralabral tear & cyst etc) I had stopped cooking altogether and getting food delivered
- Even 2 neighbours underneath my flat wrote letter to say they have been taking my meal orders up to my flat (above theirs, because I can hardly stand, walk, let alone cook a meal) for the last 2 years. That is ignored also.
- I enclosed details of a&e falls, relevant medical information Etc. All ignored.
I am confident I can prove I should get enhanced for daily living and mobility descriptors, but I am not confident they will take it into account though.

The decision was I felt sneaky, because my medication was stopped by gp because of risk of heart attacks, I was put on new one by MSK pain management pharmacist but it is not working.
I warned the decision maker they were calling me back on a specific day in March. (The pharmacist called back to put me on newer medication but with risks of heart attacks, I have not sent the letter yet, wanted to with my MR)

Well on the exact same day the decision maker made her pip review paper assessment and said that despite the fact I report a walking distance of under 20 metres, because I did not report significant changes to my pain medication to support a significant deterioration and because of using aid sometimes (I them when I got out 4 times a year, at times indoors or hold on to furniture but I hardly move indoors, I half laydown a lot, and if I move I stop at every step I take or every 1 or 2 metres) that she had decided I could walk over 20 metres but not more than 50.

Thank you ever so much Gary.
Kind wishes

Hi Olympia, I was liked you and my Review for PIP was fully completed by the DWP decision maker. When I asked for copy of report - I was advised the same. The decision maker completed the paper based assessment with no input from HCP.
Wishing you all the best with your MR. Stephie

I used this extract when I was accused of not taking strong enough pain medication. I have put the paragraph reference at the bottom.
Part 1 of the PIP Assessment Guide. “HPs must also take into consideration the invisible nature of some symptoms such as fatigue and pain which may be less easy to identify and explore through observation of the claimant. HPs should be mindful that the level of analgesia used does not necessarily correlate with the level of pain. GPs are encouraged to avoid prescribing strong painkillers for long-term pain as the harms usually outweigh the benefits and there could also be specific reasons why painkillers are not prescribed e.g. intolerance or the use of other methods of pain relief. When pain is a significant symptom we would expect the claimant to be able to describe the location, type, severity and variability of the pain they experience and the impact it has on their daily life. The HP can assess the disabling effect of the pain by considering such description (where applicable) along with all other aspects of the case, e.g. disease activity/severity, effect on daily activities, treatment, pain relief, pain management strategies, examination findings and informal observations.” (para 1.6.35)