Written evidence from (Name withheld) (PEA0003)
I have had 2 assessments for PIP. The first was the changeover from DLA to PIP. I was awarded enhanced mobility and no daily living. After requesting a mandatory reconsideration I was awarded standard rate daily living. The assessor advised that I should be reviewed in 18 months because I have progressive heart disease and my health would inevitably deteriorate. In February 2017 I received a review form to complete. I advised that some of my conditions had become worse due to the progressive nature of my disease. I have a condition called hypercholesteralaemia which means my body produces too much cholesterol which builds up in my arteries causing plaque to form. After an invasive angiogram I was diagnosed with 3 vessel coronary artery disease and diffuse microvessel disease. Hypercholesterolaemia does not only affect the heart however; it can affect every artery in the body including the brain causing cognitive decline. This has happened with me and I have had an appointment with a memory clinic and am awaiting an appointment with the neurologist to look at various treatments. Effectively only 1 artery of my heart is working properly. I cannot have stents fitted because my arteries are too small nor have bypass surgery because there is nothing to graft on to. My condition is “managed” by medication. My heart condition is not cured as I am not a suitable candidate for revascularisation. My symptoms are very life limiting causing breathlessness, angina symptoms with unstable angina on occasion, coronary artery spasm and chronic fatigue. I also have developed trigeminal neuralgia and stomach problems due to the side effects of the medications I have to take daily. That is the background to my health condition.
When I attended the second assessment the report that was produced by a general nurse said that I was witnessed walking 20metres and was slightly breathless. She stated that I could walk 20m but no more than 50m which culminated in my PIP award being reduced from enhanced to standard and made me lose my car. As I live rurally this was devastating leaving me socially isolated. I also live on my own and have no local support network. The previous assessor actually witnessed me walking 10m and I was severely breathless. This latest assessor saw me walking slowly for at most 5 metres. My condition has not improved and will not improve so there is absolutely no reason for this reduction in my award, except to save money as far as I can see. This was a blatant lie and when I put in my mandatory reconsideration I supplied photographic evidence to support the fact that this was untrue. My mandatory reconsideration was completely rejected and all the additional information disregarded. My MSP and MP made submissions on my behalf to the DWP Secretary but to no avail. I was given no good reason apart from the fact that the assessor stated she saw me walking 20m for having my award reduced. I am currently going to tribunal about this and about the fact that both the assessor and the decision maker who are not experienced in cardiology or neurology DID NOT contact my GP, my cardiologist or neurologist to get additional information. They were given the original diagnosis letter from Edinburgh Royal Infirmary along with a recent letter from my cardiologist confirming my condition had not improved. They were also given my appointment letter for the memory clinic but then stated I was not receiving specialist intervention for my cognitive decline. I am receiving specialist intervention.
There is absolutely no way that a nurse that has no speciality in cardiology or neurology or unqualified decision maker should be making decisions without reference to the specialist doctors caring for the individual personally. You cannot possibly make a decision on meeting somebody for 40-60 minutes. The assessments are currently not fit for purpose.
Additionally, I was advised that assessors are required to read through the reports with the individual being assessed as part of their assessment process. This has never happened with me or many others I have known. It should be mandatory that this happens as a true reflection of the assessment....and signed by both parties. Had this happened at my second assessment I would have immediately asked the assessor to measure the distance I walked and her statement would have required to be amended. My mobility award would therefore have remained at enhanced.
As there is a requirement of physical mobility within the PIP criteria mobility element, there should be a standard “measured” test carried out to show the actual distance the individual is able to walk either aided or unaided....safely, repeatedly etc. My mother had such a test when she applied for a blue badge. As it stands at the moment these decisions are being made on assumptions. How can that even be legal? How can somebody make a decision on a benefit for a disabled person without actually having seen them undertake any mobility test and only see them sitting in a chair in front of them.
In conclusion, the tests would benefit from having signatures by both parties to the assessment as being a true reflection AND an actual standard measured test undertaken by every individual being assessed. As it stands at the moment many assessors are twisting words, telling blatant lies and they have no accountability for doing so. They should be sanctioned if any of their decisions are overturned by a tribunal and this would mean they had an incentive to ensure their reports are accurate and reflect the ACTUAL abilities of the disabled people they are assessing. Their reports can have such a devastating effect on the person’s life. The decision makers should also be doing more scrutiny and definitely make contact with the individual’s specialist doctors. The actual application form states that specialists will be contacted if more information is required. In reality, however, the onus appears to be on the person claiming the benefit to supply that. It is hard enough being disabled or chronically ill without having the added stress of trying to put together information for their claim.
I would add that following the assessment I had in June 2017 and the lies told, I have been made to feel like a liar by the assessor and two decision makers. I am now being treated for severe stress and medicated with diazepam due to this experience. That is completely unacceptable as the last thing I need is to suffer stress with such a serious heart condition. This needs to change....AND FAST!
September 2017