Being asked if we want to continue with the PIP review having won an appeal

That the DWP's case manager was asking, and refusing to process (that is, release) the back payment of an appeal to raise the mobility component from standard to enhanced, until we chose whether to follow the appeal ruling, with the new end date of 2028, or continue with the PIP review, that had been deferred until next August seemed odd.

Supposedly it was because it is unusual to win an appeal during the review process...and granted it took us 5 years to go from zero points to 12 for the mobility component and we had to appeal appeals to get here....but it did still seem odd.

Does it seem odd to you?

That wasn't really my question or issue.

(Though there is an argument to be made, and notice has been given in the review response, that the daily living component could be marked higher. I suspect that the default response of the DWP contracted assessor would be to reduce the points scored on the 4 points descriptor and thus end the daily living component contribution, and we'd be back in the reconsideration and appeal cycle.)

Granted that we (as in this isn't my claim and I was just the claimant's partner and for the purpose of the appeal their representative) went from zero to 8(DL) and 12(m) points at appeal was a win.

What I have issue with is the DWP sitting on the back payment until a choice is made. When that choice is irrelevant to being awarded the back payment, though initially framed as such when asked.

Like how they create strange little inefficiencies like asking to confirm banking details before they make the award of a back payment, banking details they already have, let alone this odd and awful demand that we call them back immediately, or at least before 4pm, as a matter of urgency, to answer a question that is irrelevant to the back payment.

(We had to call twice as the first call was dropped before the confirmed our choice.)

For something that could be done in writing.