For the curious I have looked at the report in more detail and some more info.
Meeting with other people, I had what I believed to be strong evidence. However due to been calm at my assessment the 'a' descriptor was applied. It would seem an assumption was made that if I can handle a one on one with a doctor, then I must have no problem socialising with people. My GP and mental health professional actually suggested a much higher descriptor then I put myself on the form.
The other descriptor in regards to walking, was downplayed because I was observed to be in no pain, this one is a funny one, as I have observed that whenever I have been examined by someone regardless if its at a hospital, benefit assessment, or GP surgery, the comments put on my file have always been "patient in no observed pain", which has led me to conclude the system doctors use to determine if someone is in pain is heavily flawed. I think thats a medical profession flaw rather than a benefit system problem. Maybe they expect me to be constantly shrieking out in pain, I am not a shrieker tho. I dont have much of an issue with this descriptor I recognise this one is very hard for an assessor to judge upon. I would if it was "he can walk 200m" but was at least some recognition of walking difficulty.
The final one in relation to anxiety when going out, I only go out at dusk hours due to anxiety with the public, he was clearly told that, but was omitted from reasons on the form. However I have no issue using taxi transport, so my anxiety is mixed, the anxiety is with specifically trying to walk using my aids, I get extreme anxiety with doing that.
Its actually a 8 points care 4 mobility, I seen the wrong box when skimming through it first time, but given the care is 5x the money of the mobility (with SDP), I wont appeal this decision if it agrees with the report. The Standard Care was always the expectation for the claim, and I considered SRM to be a bonus if I got it.
