Bath MIND Citizens Advice (PEA0265)

The people who do the assessments

1. No. I work with people who have mental health problems who are applying for benefits or appealing decisions. Their evidence is ignored and undue weight is given by decision makers to the subjective opinion of healthcare professionals (HCPs) who have no background or experience in mental health. Their observations are treated as facts rather than opinions. HCPs are encouraged to use informal observations about behaviour, appearance on the day of assessment and regularly justify their conclusions by reference to the level of medication or therapeutic input that has been supplied by the NHS, which is of course in limited supply due to funding cuts. Their observations do not take account of the stigma, isolation and barriers people with mental health problems have in accessing services.
2. No, if anything the quality of assessments has gone down in the last 12 months.
3. I will not make a submission on this point.
4. Better assessments are generally made under Attendance Allowance and DLA for children and were historically done so under IB.

Appeals

1. Because the decisions are wrong.
2. It is very difficult, there are too many stages and it involves too much paperwork.

• The mandatory reconsideration (MR) process which was implemented a few years ago has had the effect of gatekeeping clients from using the independent tribunal service, which has now been found to be wrong in law by the recent upper tribunal decision [2017] UKUT 324 (AAC).
• The DWP has recently started refusing to take MRs over the telephone and insist that claimants request a review in writing.
• Many of the people claiming these benefits are vulnerable because of mental illness, illiteracy, cognitive and sensory impairments and it is therefore not reasonable to expect such people to be able to understand the complex legal tests involved and, in some cases, draft even the simplest letter requesting a review of a DWP decision.
• Many of the clients I work with need extra time to challenge a decision or gather evidence and the one month time limit for MR was neither sufficient nor flexible enough to deal with this.
• Many claimants are placed into hardship by the extra delays and have no certainty about how long a review will take to be completed, as DWP refuse to provide a timescale over the telephone. During this period their benefit is often stopped and some will need to make new claims for benefit which can create further delays and loss of income.
• Clients need help to complete appeal forms.
• Clients find it increasingly difficult to  access impartial advice as advice services face cuts from local authorities.
• Clients find the whole process highly distressing, which can lead to health and social care issues.

3. They are both badly flawed, but there seems to be a particularly high degree of error in PIP assessments  at the moment.
4. Get the decisions right in the first place. This will involve significantly improved training. It is widely thought that the DWP and its partners are working towards targets in some cases and this is not appropriate – each case must be examined on its merits.

How was it for you?

3. People with mental health problems have difficulties accessing the whole process and cannot cope with the series of rejections and bureaucratic steps usually required of them.
4. Yes, joined up thinking would be helpful, although the tests are largely separate ones with only a few areas of overlap.
5. Training.

November 2017