Preparing Food PIP

Jan

The legal test is for the claimant to prepare and cook a simple meal, even if they were classed as being able to prepare the food, which I agree with Mrs H is ridiculous and does not follow the spirit of the law, if they are unable to then cook the meal they cannot be consider to have passed the test.

Gordon

JanN wrote: Thank you Mrs H and Gordon for your helpful replies. That is really interesting regarding the law and needing to be able to prepare and cook food. Does the requirement of being able to prepare and cook food apply only to descriptor (f) cannot cook at all or does it equally apply to descriptor (e) needing assistance to prepare a simple meal? If the assistance needed from a carer is the cooking aspect but some of the preparation happens from bed does this change things? I agree it is ridiculous and the fact remains my husband cannot prepare from bed anyway but I am still wondering whether the requirement to be able to contribute to both the preparation and the cooking applies to descriptor (e)?


Many thanks

The test is to prepare and cook a simple meal, this applies to all of the Descriptors.

OK this is not a simple argument as it relies on a number of legal definitions, you would also need to include "reliably" and "for the majority of days.

So (f) means in simple terms, that even with the use of aids or appliances or someone to provide prompting, supervision or assistance, the claimant cannot prepare and cook a simple meal.

The meaning of (e) hangs on the definitions of;

supervision” means the continuous presence of another person for the purpose of ensuring the safety of the claimant. Note that the supervising person is not involved in the preparation and cooking of the meal.

“assistance” means physical intervention by another person and does not include speech. I think it reasonable to argue that whilst assistance might include the replacement of some functions that the claimant might perform; lifting of pans as an example, it does not mean the replacement of a significant part of the test, either preparing the food or cooking it.

So I believe it possible to argue, even if it was believed that he could prepare the food (which I don't believe is reasonable), that his inability to cook could not be replaced by someone assisting him, but you will need to explain in detail why this is the case.

Gordon