× Members

Anyone had because you can drive a manual car.....

More
6 years 2 months ago #204977 by braveheart
Just wondering if anyone else has had the claim by ATOS that because a claimant can drive a manual car (even if you don't drive very far - doctors appointments etc) that you can manage complex budgeting decisions? That is what you are up against in this ridiculous assessment process. What next, because you can read a book, you can cook a meal? Anyone else had any unbelievable 'reasons' by ATOS to deny people what they lawfully should be entitled to?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 2 months ago #204998 by Gordon
braveheart

We see this quite often. there is some merit to the argument so it is certainly something that you need to deal with in any challenge to a Decision.

Gordon

Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 2 months ago #205004 by dwmullings
Because my husband can drive an automatic car adapted with a left foot accelerateor he can cook a meal,manage his own affairs ,has no mobility problems,no communication difficulties. He is now a miracle man since his assessment .I wonder
why I have been caring for him constantly for the last 30 years.and he has been unable to work.I wonder why as driving a car makes him so capable His mobility car has been returned ????

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 2 months ago #205020 by MadH

braveheart wrote: Just wondering if anyone else has had the claim by ATOS that because a claimant can drive a manual car (even if you don't drive very far - doctors appointments etc) that you can manage complex budgeting decisions? That is what you are up against in this ridiculous assessment process. What next, because you can read a book, you can cook a meal? Anyone else had any unbelievable 'reasons' by ATOS to deny people what they lawfully should be entitled to?


Yes I did Braveheart. But with regards to my mobility and physical strength... grip, power in upper and lower body. However, I see what Gordon means there is some merit to this thinking but I personally think it would be merit-able (if that’s I word lol) if one was driving a 30 yr old Volvo. I’m a shortie. Basically I’m right up to the steering wheel. My car as with all modern cars has power steering, springloaded gears ... is that the terminology?… and hardly need to tap the clutch to change gears. Equally with the gutsy breaks and accelerator. Gripping the steering wheel is more of a firm gentle hold to pass/pull the power steering wheel round.
I got this observation in my DWP appeal letter with tribunal bundle...they’d not brought this up in any other decision and I think they’re clutching a straws now. I too don’t drive often and only local. I had to terminate my motability scheme vehicle and I’m very fortunate my partner bought a little 12yr old, two door Yaris for me to get about or I’d be tearing my hair out. Good luck with your claim.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 2 months ago #205060 by braveheart
Im sorry Gordon but I do not agree. Lets face it, the whole PIP assessment procedure is not fit for purpose. Stating that an award should be given if it applies for the majority of days just does not mean that when it comes to assessment. You say that there is some merit in my example of driving a car. Sorry, I disagree. If my mental health condition means that on the majority of days I need help with something like complex budgeting decisions, my ability to be able to go out and use my car to go to hospital or the GP on just a few days a month, even then if I am able to do so, should not dismiss my meeting for the criteria. If the rules of the majority of days really did mean anything for PIP, then it would be feasible to state that you feel mentally able to be able to drive for 14 days of the month as it is the minority of the time. If you said that to an assessor you may as well rip your claim up and throw it in the bin. Even if you had loads of psychiatric reports stating that you have a mental health condition that severely restricts your abilities to carry out tasks unaided for the majority of the time, the assessor would never, ever take that into account, and yet the criteria is for most days. The assessment, and appeal system is massively flawed and not fit for purpose. It is disgraceful how vulnerable people are being forced into hardship when they should be given an award based on the majority of the time. I think that if they want to play that game, then PIP should be awarded on being unable to carry out a task for 95% of the time because any assessor would be looking at that sort of ratio. Another example is your health conditions being dismissed because you may have shaved on the day of the assessment. Ridiculous. You may have been able to shave that day but for the next 20 days you couldn't. Do you suggest that people should not shave even if they feel they are able to on that day, just to make a point?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 2 months ago - 6 years 2 months ago #205065 by Gordon
Braveheart

I'm sorry you don't like my comment, however, I stand by it, but I am not saying that it cannot be argued against.

Whether we like it or not the assessment process is what it is(in case there is any doubt in your mind, I do not like it), it's not going to change in the near future and my role is to help claimants provide the best arguments that they can to score the points required for the award they should receive.

Driving a car is a standard argument used by assessors, they use it because it is an understandable example and does, as I have said, have some merit where the claimant is claiming some level of cognitive impairment. It's not a strong argument so turning it around, if you have not overcome the driving argument and this may annoy you further, then it suggests that the information you included in your form was weak or not persuasive.

So consider what you said, make sure that you understand the criteria you are being assessed against and in particular the definitions for simple and complex budgeting decisions. If there are issues of reliability then explain them in detail and give examples.

Will this overcome the bias of the Decision Maker to follow the recommendation of the assessor, possibly not, but it might, if nothing else it will place you in a better position if you go onto appeal

Gordon

Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Last edit: 6 years 2 months ago by Gordon.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: GordonGaryBISCatherineWendyKellygreekqueenpeterKatherineSuper UserjimmckChris
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.