Appeal familiar journey

I am my autistic sons appointee. He had to have a face to face assessment as they said the reports I sent in were too old. The Assessor said in two parts that he could not follow a familiar journey alone yet the last part she ticked the cannot follow an unfamiliar journey. So they only awarded standard mobility and only two years. I asked for an MR on the length of the award and the fact that it should have been (f) as the Assessor had said. They have now turned down the MR as they looked at one of the old reports which had a ticked box for independent travel from the OT(2004) (which was ticked as he had a mini bus to college paid for by the council as he could not travel on public transport. Not quite sure how to put it in the submission. Any ideas?

Gordon

Many thanks for your swift reply.

The DWP seem to think that there is a miracle cure out there for Autism/ADHD/Anxiety and Depression. How I wish there was. What is their difference between following a journey and following any journey?

The mini bus to college was with an escort and was in 2004 as the SEN department decided he could not go independently so provided both the transport and escort - he no longer attends college (not that he managed it much then).

This is what the Assessor wrote at the face to face regarding planning and following journeys. "He goes on a familiar journey once a week he will drive to get the shopping but is always accompanied as he gets too anxious that he would not manage a diversion. He needs to be accompanied on all journeys on public transport as any diversions cause him great anxiety. He can walk to his local shop or walking around his village, if there was a diversion on this journey such as roadworks he would feel uneasy. He usually goes out 3 times a week as long as he is accompanied due to anxiety. He would struggle to see a timetable when the seasons change as the times get complicated. He has never been able to do a new journey alone due to severe anxiety and would not manage a diversion unless accompanied."

Also under social and occupational history the Assessor wrote ... "Driving - He passed the theory test and is driving presently. He is always accompanied in case there is a diversion even on a familiar journey. It took him a few years to learn to drive due to not understanding how to do it. ...he uses it once a week but is unable to go anywhere new and drives a couple of miles."

My son doesnt own a car. He hardly ever drives and he will only drive if someone is in the car with him.

Susie

Hi, Many thanks for your invaluable advice. Have drafted up the submission. Have to post it today. Thoughts?
I, as APPOINTEE am submitting this further evidence on his behalf.
In response to Atos Healthcare “supplementary advice note PA5” and Reply from the Department of Work and Pensions referring to an OT Report (see copy of the original OT Report document supplied by xxxx xxxxxx County Council dated 2004).
Point 1
This OT Report was the very reason for the face to face assessment as the Assessor pointed out on the day of the assessment that it had been necessary to have a face to face due to the fact that the Report was too old. I explained that I had attached the report as it accurately describes sensory/daily living problems. As far as the “independent travel” tick box in this Report is concerned this “independent travel” was on a mini bus with an escort paid and supplied by xxxx xxxxxx County Council due to the fact that could NOT travel by Public Transport. This transport was provided for him on educational grounds so that could get to college in 2004. I am obtaining the information/proof from xxxx xxxxxx County Council under the Freedom of Information Act. Meanwhile, I have included information obtained from xxxx xxxxxx County Council regarding transport policy for learners of sixth form age and continuing learners aged 19+. He always carried a mobile phone in case he could not manage at college and needed to be collected early. This happened on many an occasion.
Unfortunately, it cannot be said on the one hand that the OT Report is too old and he needs a face to face assessment (despite the stress and anxiety that it caused) and then on the other hand use the very same Report (tick box – nowhere in the OT Report does it state in writing that can travel independently, therefore, a tick in a box is not a reliable statement) and is also contradictory to what was discussed and reported at the Assessment by the ATOS Assessor.
Also please see copy of GP’s request for a parking permit for myself and due to his anxiety and inability to travel by public transport. (Page 124 of DWP bundle.
Point 2
Familiar Journey
When following a familiar journey i.e. local shop. We live on the busy A road where there are quite a few accidents. has someone with him. On a quite a few occasions the road has been closed due to an accident. When this happened had to be brought home as the (a) the thought of an accident and (b) how were we to get around to get to the shop if the road is closed. This is usually followed by a meltdown with the frustration, overwhelming anxiety and depression of not being able to purchase what he needed from the shop. Another issue has is if the person in the shop is not the usual one. He finds he cannot ask for anything at all and the person with him has to know what he wanted from the shop. For an autistic person this is instant overwhelming anxiety followed by depression. ‘s anxiety and depression have increased as he has got older. I have attached a letter (as evidence) from ’s psychiatrist showing the levels of anxiety and depression are extremely high.

The same letter sent to ’s GP from ‘s Consultant Psychiatrist recommends he have Cognitive Therapy. He would not be recommending this if did not have cognitive impairment. Cognitive impairment does not mean he is stupid it means he cannot cope with people and the world around him. It is humiliating for people to have to try to prove that they cannot do things that most other people can do to function day-to-day. A High Court ruling in 2017 recognized that PIP assessments were discriminatory for excluding the effects of mental illness on mobility.
Definitions of the terms used in the PIP descriptors are defined in regulations as “psychological distress” means distress related to an enduring mental health condition or an intellectual or cognitive impairment;
has Autism which is an enduring mental health condition.
Descriptor F (12 points): Cannot follow the route of a familiar journey without another person, an assistance dog or an orientation aid.
This descriptor is most likely to apply to claimants with cognitive, sensory or developmental impairments, or a mental health condition that results in overwhelming psychological distress, who cannot, due to their impairment, work out where to go, follow directions, follow a journey safely or deal with unexpected changes in their journey, even when the journey is familiar. A
claimant who suffers overwhelming psychological distress whilst on a familiar journey and who needs to be accompanied to over come the overwhelming psychological distress may satisfy descriptor F.
The Assessor clearly states (twice) that is accompanied on a familiar journey.
Conclusion
I believe that should have been awarded 12 points for his problems with getting around and that he qualifies for the enhanced rate of the Mobility component. I believe that the scores for daily living are correct and that the Tribunal need not consider this aspect of my appeal.

Length of Award
has been awarded three years. As previously stated Autism is a lifelong condition as stated in the Autism Act 2009.
To fix a term is inappropriate for a lifelong condition. Paragraphs 62, 63, 66, 73 and 74 from the judgement of RS –v- Sec of State for Work and Pensions [2016] UKUT 0085 (AAC).