ANKYLOSING SPONYLITIS RECONSIDERATION

Sorry, am I misreading the descriptor?

The descriptor makes reference to 'mobilizing' with or without a wheelchair, which to me would mean would mean walking?

When may dad is at his worst especially he is unable to walk even a few metres let alone 50 metres without having to stop due to pain. If this was confirmed by a doctor or consultant might this count as evidence?

Bluebear wrote: Sorry, am I misreading the descriptor?

The descriptor makes reference to 'mobilizing' with or without a wheelchair, which to me would mean would mean walking?

When may dad is at his worst especially he is unable to walk even a few metres let alone 50 metres without having to stop due to pain. If this was confirmed by a doctor or consultant might this count as evidence?

Hi Bb,

I can assure you that Dad will also be assessed on whether he can self propel a manual wheelchair unaided.

It is not simply a "walking test" it changed from a "walking test" alone in April 2011.

Many claimants clearly pass the walking part of the "mobilising" descriptor but are deemed capable of "mobilising" as they are assessed as being able to self propel a manual wheelchair the requisite 50 metres.

If you insist on only relying on the fact that Dad cannot "walk" the requisite 50 metres, you will fail.

bro58

Hi Bb,

You could also look at Activity 2, (and any other descriptors that you think that he may qualify under)

"2. Transferring from one seated position to another.

2 Cannot move between one seated position and another seated position located next to one another without receiving physical assistance from another person."

As if he can't transfer from one seated position to another, as above, then this would also limit use of a manual wheelchair.

So, even though the evidence that Dad cannot "walk" the requisite 50 metres will help to pass part of Activity/Descriptor 1. you will also have to show that he cannot self propel a manual wheelchair unaided over the same distance, or that it would not be "Reasonable" to expect him to.

With regards to whether it is "Reasonable" has it ever been suggested to Dad by his G.P. or other treating HCP that he should use a manual wheelchair ?

Are there any restrictions to using or storing a wheelchair in Dads accommodation ?

Has he been told that a manual wheelchair is not suitable for his conditions, etc, etc.

bro58

bro58 wrote: Hi Bb,

You could also look at Activity 2, (and any other descriptors that you think that he may qualify under)

"2. Transferring from one seated position to another.

2 Cannot move between one seated position and another seated position located next to one another without receiving physical assistance from another person."

As if he can't transfer from one seated position to another, as above, then this would also limit use of a manual wheelchair.

So, even though the evidence that Dad cannot "walk" the requisite 50 metres will help to pass part of Activity/Descriptor 1. you will also have to show that he cannot self propel a manual wheelchair unaided over the same distance, or that it would not be "Reasonable" to expect him to.

With regards to whether it is "Reasonable" has it ever been suggested to Dad by his G.P. or other treating HCP that he should use a manual wheelchair ?

Are there any restrictions to using or storing a wheelchair in Dads accommodation ?

Has he been told that a manual wheelchair is not suitable for his conditions, etc, etc.

bro58

Thanks bro58

My dad's condition, Ankylosing Spondylitis, is helped naught my neither walking sticks or wheelchairs. Pain and discomfort can be a constant. Regardless of whether a walking stick is used or not, any movement, especially when symptoms are flared will cause further discomfort and exhaustion. A wheelchair, in my dad's case, would be even less effective due to him being unable to stand or sit for prolonged periods, let alone have the energy to push himself around as well. We have spoken my dad's doctor and consultant, who have offered to provide further written evidence towards his reconsideration. Though I have a feeling any evidence supplied will still fall on deaf ears. I feel that the DWP simply make the decisions they make purely because they can, pushing people on to the HM Courts/tribunal. It's sad that people who are genuinely ill have to pester health workers for assistance. HM Courts and health workers are pushed enough without this extra work.

About a week and a half ago I was told that my dad's reconsideration (from July assessment) was still open and that any further evidence would be accepted still. Another doctors and consultants letter are now been put together and we should have them shortly.

I believe the the option to appeal against the reconsideration decision ends November 25th. A complaints team within the DWP said if we wanted to appeal against the reconsideration decision (even though we're still waiting on a hearing relating to the decision made November '12) we'd just have to email them - which we've done. That's all we had to do, apparently.

But online there's mention of filling in GL24 forms (I think) and having to contact the courts directly. I contacted the DWP to see if our email to them was enough, and mentioned the GL24 forms etc. They said they'd get back to me if needed/send a form if needed.

But so far... nothing. Are we being tricked into not appealing correctly? Do we need to appeal against the decision as hearing still pending from Non '12 decision?

As soon as the additional evidence comes through (hopefully within the next day or so) I'll email it over to the DWP.

Also, I read that with regards to reconsiderations a decision maker is meant to call you. Is this correct? If it's correct, though we requested reconsideration, sent in addition evidence (more to come soon), no contact has been made.