Is there any consistency in the PIP award system?

The more I read the threads, the more despondent i become. We owe a great debt of gratitude to this site. PIP is a mine field and it seems few escape unscathed.
I was awarded DLA highest mobility and medium living in 2009 for an indefinite period. My first attempt at PIP yielded the lower rate for both. I was expected to travel to central Birmingham in the rush hour for an F2F despite what was written on my form. I complained by phone but told a home visit was very unlikely. Undaunted I wrote an impassioned plea to Capita and was granted a home visit (although this was cancelled by Capita and put back a fortnight.) The F2F seemed to go well, but the outcome was unsatisfactory. The report criticised me for maintaining eye contact and appearing well groomed. This to me is just good manners. I immediately phoned and asked for a MR, being told there was little chance of a change. I again wrote in quoting from my DLA award letter, stating that I could barely walk. Within a very short time I received letter elevating me to the higher mobility. At this stage I gave up as the status quo had been restored, mainly as it was clear that many had much more serious problems.
Some questions remain though: I did not see the report but it was clearly highly inaccurate, reference was made on the phone to my GP's report- she never wrote one. Despite the home visit on psychological grounds, I received no points on the anxiety part of mobility.(pre March 16) This is long-winded but in view of the horrific cases I read about, I want to show that you can beat the evils of PIP application. Don't let them grind you down!

Hi and Welcome to the forum, you might want to have a look at the following FAQ which explains where everything is

Welcome to Benefits and Work

Thank you for your post - you are right that there seems to be considerable variation in the decisions that are made on PIP claims. This is in addition to the fact that PIP was deliberately designed to be harder to get than DLA in order to drive down the benefits bill