Mandatory Reconsideration

Hi folks.
You may recall i have a hideous PIP assessment which is wrong in a multitude of areas.
So far my approach has been to counter every single issue in my respinse to Submit for MR.
Im probably going to end up at tribunal, and have resigned myself to that fact, but will i do any harm at MR by going gung ho for the report and picking up on all the major issues, or should i focus on a select few.
Ive got issues of lies, omissions assumptions, some missing abbreviation explanations
Missing diagnoses, missing medications, contradictions and all sorts. The report is literally riddled with issues even down to the nit picky spelling punchtuation and grammar.

My process is to get it all out.
My question is should i then condense it to the major points for them at MR, or lay it bare for them to see the crock that it really is, and let them unpick it as i have had to do.

Thanks.

Thank you Gordon,
I thouroughly addressed every single point of contention within the report and the decision makers explanation.

So many more shocking discoveries that i made by doing so, and they have a task on their hands if they truely do read and take into consideration everything i have written as it was over 40 pages long in the end.
I am aware this would have to be considerably reduced in size when i get to the tribunal stage, but the HP report was 36 pages long, and rebutting, whilst highlighting all my words of evidentiary value that the HP actively decided to exclude to my detriment, was a very lengthy process.

I am still quite shocked by the standard of the report. Claiming i have no cognitive impairment be ause i passed a driving test 35 years ago by being able to read.

Claiming that i dont have diagnoses that i do.
Claiming that i have no anxiety as i do not take anti anxiety rescue medication, that when mixed with my current prescriptions would quite literally, kill me.

And on, and on it goes.

The decison maker and HP seemed happy to ignore their own guidelines for assesments, stating despite not eating 4 days a week and eating probably kn average 1 meal a day that is a microwave preprepared meal, that this is not an issue.
Im aghast that a decison maker thinks it is okay to take 1 preprepared meal a day as the truth, yet ignore guidelines that seemingly state this is not adequate.

I could go on, but i wont.

Thank you for your time, and i will post back once i have heard.
The deadline was today for my evidence, which i struggled to meet, not being able to complete any other tasks in the run up to posting.,it was delivered and signed for at 5am this morning.

They cannot accuse me of not giving them ample explanation of my impairments over 40 pages. But i have no doubt i will end up in tribunal.

I will need guidance on how to condense those pages into a short submission for tribunal though, but as everything wrong has been challenged, they cannot claim of surprises.

Thanks again.