ref 1st assessors reports.findings And Tribunals

Hi again

Do not mean to Labour on re my recent Q: earlier the other day in this thread
If I can be specific thanks if the Professional*/Doctor* Consultant of the claimant l and the "claimant" both say same thing
that is because of condition X eg using a chronic long term condition/s or condition Y etc:
Can the a) PIP assessor after the assessment still disagree with this medical evidence and along verbal and written from claimant ? Is assessor able to "validly" say claimant can do x or y even though evidence* etc is showing not./ does assessor have to justify*?
b): if it does goes further to
Tribunal does the same apply or can be done thanks for reply sorry if I have confused anyone.

Hi apple i have read all your posts carefully and i think i know what you mean (im sure Gordon knows what you mean too from his replies and experience)

I just thought i would have a go at answering just in case I can shed any extra light.

As far as I understand it awards are made not on the diagnosis at all but on how that disability impacts on you being able to carry out the things asked on the form.

Therefore, to take up your example a person could be diagnosed with depression and might well have provided evidence to show that they are on medication for depression, they have evidence to show they go to counselling and there is no doubt their diagnosis is genuine.


If it then emerges that, despite the depression they are a single parent to a child. They feed, clothe and get the child to school on time. They walk the dog daily as it helps when they get out in the fresh air etc etc


Well - the panel might well think this person is improving and the medication, counselling etc are working well if she/he is able to take care of the child with no additional help. And a dog.


Do you see what i mean.


Same with a physical disability. Someone might have a long list of medications and hospital admissions but that might mean nothing.

In fact i can give you a real life example of one of my sons who has a massive medical file but we never claimed benefits and he would never have been eligible.

He had a terrible road accident. Almost lost his foot. Severe leg injuries. Lots of operations. 4 months in hospital. Skin grafts. Was always expected to be able to walk again but initially it was thought he would be in a wheelchair for a long time (about a year)

He had a lot of physio to get him walking. The list of injuries and medications, creams and attention needed on his graft was extensive.

Within 3 months, he was out of that chair and on crutches. And he could move fast on those crutches! Much faster than I could walk!

So - on a pip assessment he would have scored nil. Despite reams of medical evidence and no doubt severe injuries the impact on his ability to do activities of daily living was nil. He could shower, dress and everything.


Had he gone into a deep depression over the appearance of his foot (and it was grossly abnormal) he might well have refused to take care of it, refused to wash it and shut himself away. Then that same injury could have qualified him as then it would be impacting his life significantly. So the same injury can have a very different effect on different people and the assessors need to make sure your description matches up consistantly with everything you say and write.

Some people have significant, diagnosed conditions yet through support from family, friends and agencies, sheer determination and other strengths to compensate, they can manage pretty well. That's why the diagnosis doesnt tell the full story.


Happy to say, my son's accident was 10 yrs ago. He can wear a normal shoe on that foot and he gets on with life no problem.



Hope that helps, apple.

Hi Anisty I appreciate your response:
Glad to hear your son's health is much better and does not need?PIP.
Given the reply
I perhaps was not clear enough .
I will give it a last try
If someone has "health" condition/s X Y or Z (rather than use any particularly named one/s:
for the nub of this Q.

The PIP "claimant/transferee"using answering one or more of the descriptors as appropriate applicable several if they have several conditions as could be of the descriptors "relevant" says I can do x y z.
The conditions may well also be long term : some maybe chronic /ongoing conditions
The claimant does not have much or any help and also can still need assistance : though getting it, again they may use aids etc as in the Guides, and of have little help, and no child or dog.
Along with PIP1 then to 2 on completing they also provide a medical report or letter evidence from the applicable clinician or specialist, that is relevant to both their conditions and the descriptors .

Is it is the case as a w/f adviser was saying the assessor capita or altos or whatever they are called these days: the HCP which I believe are mainly physios in percentage, some are nurses
can say oh we disagree with the persons clinician consultant that the persons has got condition x y or x or a b or whatever it was?
despite though all if you like avenues and documentations say they do have and that they have not been doing the daily activity etc and certainly if at all not reliably etc a) safely; (b) to an acceptable standard; (c) repeatedly; and (d) within a reasonable time period..

and at MR can they they say same?
Again if it goes as far as tribunal can they say the same.

I suppose another way of putting it is ignoring all the evidence ?

thank you AB)