U. T. Decision re face to face Socialising,                  with Template Letters.

In decision CPIP/2685/2016 the Upper Tribunal has made an important clarification of the law on PIP which may help anyone who has problems engaging with other people face-to-face.
 

Descriptor 9 of PIP means that people who have issues engaging with other people face to face can earn points toward an award of PIP. DWP has routinely used the fact that a claimant was able to engage with the ATOS or Capita assessor or attend medical appointments as proof that people do not deserve points for engagement.
 

The Upper Tribunal has now said that this is not correct and that the assessors, DWP and Tribunals should look at how people engage in *social situations,* not professional or medical settings.
 

The Upper Tribunal has said that the following specific questions need to be asked:

- in a social situation, can the person interact with others in a contextually and socially appropriate manner? - in a social situation, can the person understand body language? - in a social situation, can the person establish relationships?

If a person cannot do this, then they should be entitled to points under descriptor 9. However, the test is still about engagement in social situations and a person who cannot engage owing to other reasons can still get points.
 

ADDED

In decision CPIP/2523/2016 the Upper Tribunal added that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals needed to look at how people engaged in social situations with strangers and people they knew. Not looking at both would be an error of law.
 

In the same judgement, the Upper Tribunal said that it was not enough to assume that people could engage with others just because a person went to places such as shops and pubs.
The UT said that it was possible to go to such places and have very little social engagement and that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals should look at what sort of social engagement actually happened rather than assuming that it occurred.

 

This information is brought to you by BuDS Benefit Information Project. It is general information and you should take advice on your own case.
 

The full judgement can be read here: http://administrativeappeals.decisions.tribunals.gov.uk/…/v…
 

Letter Templates      Problems Engaging Face to Face       To send with PIP Application Form
 

Your Address
 

Date
 

DWP/Health Advisor Address
 

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Pip Claim. Your Name. Your NI number (Very Important)

Please find enclosed my PIP Claim Form. I would like to remind you of decision CPIP/2685/2016 in which the Upper Tribunal has made an important clarification of the law on PIP with regards to anyone who has problems engaging with other people face-to-face as I do.

Descriptor 9 means that people who have issues engaging with other people face to face can earn points toward an award of PIP. The Upper Tribunal has now said that this it is not correct to use the fact that a claimant is able to engage with a Health Professional in your employ (Hereafter referred to as the Assessor) or attend medical appointments as proof that claimants do not deserve points for engagement and that the Assessors, DWP and Tribunals should look at how people engage in “social situations”, not professional or medical settings.
 

The Upper Tribunal has said that the following specific questions need to be asked:

- in a social situation, can the person interact with others in a contextually and socially appropriate manner? - in a social situation, can the person understand body language? - in a social situation, can the person establish relationships? If a person cannot do this, then they should be entitled to points under descriptor 9.
 

In decision CPIP/2523/2016 the Upper Tribunal added that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals needed to look at how people engaged in social situations with strangers and people they knew.
 

In the same judgement, the Upper Tribunal said that it was not enough to assume that people could engage with others just because a person went to other places, such as shops. The Upper Tribunal said that it was possible to go to such places and have very little social engagement and that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals should look at what sort of social engagement actually happened rather than assuming that it occurred.
 

I would like to make it clear that if I am called for a PIP face to face assessment concerning my problems with social engagement whilst I may be able to interact with an Assessor in a medical context simply because I am forced to appear before this person, this does NOT mean that I am able to interact in a social manner with strangers on a day to day basis or in fact that I am able to socially interact with people who are known to me in any given environment.

(I enclose evidence that in fact the opposite is true and that) The Assessor will be seen by me to be a ‘Medical Professional’ and therefore someone I am forced to interact with, certainly NOT someone I would be looking to establish a personal relationship with.
 

I trust that you will give due consideration to this new legislation when considering my PIP application.

Yours faithfully
 

Your name
 

To send with Mandatory Reconsideration

Your Address
 

Date
 

DWP  Address
 

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Pip Claim. Your Name. Your NI number (Very Important) Mandatory Consideration Request.

Further to my request for a Mandatory Reconsideration (date if sending this after the request) I would like to remind you of decision CPIP/2685/2016 in which the Upper Tribunal has made an important clarification of the law on PIP with regards to anyone who has problems engaging with other people face-to-face.
 

Descriptor 9 means that people who have issues engaging with other people face to face can earn points toward an award of PIP. The Upper Tribunal has now said that this it is not correct to use the fact that a claimant is able to engage with a Health Professional in your employ (Hereafter referred to as the Assessor) or attend medical appointments as proof that claimants do not deserve points for engagement and that the Assessors, DWP and Tribunals should look at how people engage in “social situations”, not professional or medical settings.
 

The Upper Tribunal has said that the following specific questions need to be asked:

- in a social situation, can the person interact with others in a contextually and socially appropriate manner? - in a social situation, can the person understand body language? - in a social situation, can the person establish relationships? If a person cannot do this, then they should be entitled to points under descriptor 9.

In decision CPIP/2523/2016 the Upper Tribunal added that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals needed to look at how people engaged in social situations with strangers and people they knew.
 

In the same judgement, the Upper Tribunal said that it was not enough to assume that people could engage with others just because a person went to other places, such as shops. The Upper Tribunal said that it was possible to go to such places and have very little social engagement and that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals should look at what sort of social engagement actually happened rather than assuming that it occurred.
 

I would like to make it clear that when I was called for a PIP face to face assessment concerning my problems with social engagement did interact with an Assessor in a medical context simply because I was forced to appear before this person, this does NOT mean that I am able to interact in a social manner with strangers on a day to day basis or in fact that I am able to socially interact with people who are known to me in any given environment.

I enclose evidence that in fact the opposite is true and that the Assessor was seen by me to be a ‘Medical Professional’ and therefore someone I was forced to interact with, certainly NOT someone I would be looking to establish a personal relationship with.
 

I trust that you will give due consideration to this new legislation when considering the Mandatory Reconsideration of my PIP Decision.
 

Yours faithfully
 

Your name
 

CC: Your MP

 

To send with request for Tribunal

Your Address
 

Date
 

Tribunal Address
 

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Pip Claim. Your Name. Your NI number (Very Important) Appeal to Tribunal (Tribunal Reference Number - on your letter)

Please find enclosed my request for an Appeal at Tribunal with regards to my PIP decision (dated xxx). I would like to remind you of decision CPIP/2685/2016 in which the Upper Tribunal has made an important clarification of the law on PIP with regards to anyone who has problems engaging with other people face-to-face.
 

Descriptor 9 means that people who have issues engaging with other people face to face can earn points toward an award of PIP. The Upper Tribunal has now said that this it is not correct to use the fact that a claimant is able to engage with a Health Professional in your employ (Hereafter referred to as the Assessor) or attend medical appointments as proof that claimants do not deserve points for engagement and that the Assessors, DWP and Tribunals should look at how people engage in “social situations”, not professional or medical settings.
 

The Upper Tribunal has said that the following specific questions need to be asked:

- in a social situation, can the person interact with others in a contextually and socially appropriate manner? - in a social situation, can the person understand body language? - in a social situation, can the person establish relationships? If a person cannot do this, then they should be entitled to points under descriptor 9.
 

In decision CPIP/2523/2016 the Upper Tribunal added that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals needed to look at how people engaged in social situations with strangers and people they knew.
 

In the same judgement, the Upper Tribunal said that it was not enough to assume that people could engage with others just because a person went to other places, such as shops. The Upper Tribunal said that it was possible to go to such places and have very little social engagement and that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals should look at what sort of social engagement actually happened rather than assuming that it occurred.
 

I would like to make it clear that when I was called for a PIP face to face assessment concerning my problems with social engagement whilst I may have been able to interact with an Assessor in a medical context simply because I was forced to appear before this person, this does NOT mean that I am able to interact in a social manner with strangers on a day to day basis or in fact that I am able to socially interact with people who are known to me in any given environment.
 

I enclose evidence that in fact the opposite is true and that the Assessor was seen by me to be a ‘Medical Professional’ and therefore someone I am forced to interact with, certainly NOT someone I would be looking to establish a personal relationship with.
 

I respectfully request that the Tribunal give due consideration to this new legislation when considering my Appeal.

Yours faithfully
 

Your name
 

CC: DWP/Your MP
 

To send if Tribunal Date already given

Your Address

Date

Tribunal

Address

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Pip Claim. Your Name. Your NI number (Very Important) Tribunal Reference (Very Important)

I refer to my Tribunal to be held on (date). I would be grateful if you could refer to decision CPIP/2685/2016 in which the Upper Tribunal has made an important clarification of the law on PIP with regards to anyone who has problems engaging with other people face-to-face.
 

Descriptor 9 means that people who have issues engaging with other people face to face can earn points toward an award of PIP. The Upper Tribunal has now said that this it is not correct to use the fact that a claimant is able to engage with a Health Professional in your employ (Hereafter referred to as the Assessor) or attend medical appointments as proof that claimants do not deserve points for engagement and that the Assessors, DWP and Tribunals should look at how people engage in “social situations”, not professional or medical settings.
 

The Upper Tribunal has said that the following specific questions need to be asked:

- in a social situation, can the person interact with others in a contextually and socially appropriate manner? - in a social situation, can the person understand body language? - in a social situation, can the person establish relationships? If a person cannot do this, then they should be entitled to points under descriptor 9.

In decision CPIP/2523/2016 the Upper Tribunal added that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals needed to look at how people engaged in social situations with strangers and people they knew.
 

In the same judgement, the Upper Tribunal said that it was not enough to assume that people could engage with others just because a person went to other places, such as shops etc. The Upper Tribunal said that it was possible to go to such places and have very little social engagement and that assessors, the DWP and Tribunals should look at what sort of social engagement actually happened rather than assuming that it occurred.
 

I would like to make it clear that when I was called for a PIP face to face assessment concerning my problems with social engagement whilst I may have been able to interact with an Assessor in a medical context simply because I was forced to appear before this person, this does NOT mean that I am able to interact in a social manner with strangers on a day to day basis or in fact that I am able to socially interact with people who are known to me in any given environment.
 

I enclose evidence that in fact the opposite is true and that the Assessor was seen by me to be a ‘Medical Professional’ and therefore someone I was forced to interact with, certainly NOT someone I would be looking to establish a personal relationship with.
 

I respectfully request that you give due consideration to this new legislation when considering my Appeal.

Yours faithfully
 

Your name
 

Cc: DWP/Your MP

 ©A1 ESA/DLA/PIP Benefits Help and Support (UK only)