Are you Lacking motivation to wash, get dressed or prepare and cook food as described in the PIP descriptors and haven't been awarded points by the Decision Maker for not being able to complete these tasks?
Do you need prompting to wash, change your clothes or prepare food, because you don't see the need to do these things?
Read this article to understand how to use a specific piece of caselaw to score points.
This article will look at a specific piece of caselaw that you can use in your Mandatory Reconsideration request or Appeal Court submissions to demonstrate that you should be awarded points in the relevant descriptors if you have to be prompted for more than 50% of the time.
CPIP/181/2016 (2016) UKUT 194 (AAC) was a case that was looked at by an Upper tier Tribunal after the First tier Tribunal (normal appeal court) had dismissed a claimants case because sometimes he was able to motivate himself to do tasks such as washing and bathing if he felt that he had sufficient impetus (reason) to do so. The first appeal hearing ruled that as the claimant could do a task when he wanted to do it, on the occasions that he needed to prompted or told to do it, because he wasn't motivated to do the task, he was wilfully choosing not to and as such he shouldn't score points for needing prompting.
As we will see later in this article, this decision by the first appeal panel was not correct..........
Extract from case papers
The claimant had, before the first tribunal, relied upon the claimed lack of motivation in relation to the descriptors linked to the activities of preparing food, washing and bathing and dressing and undressing. The tribunal did not, though, award any points in relation to any of that. As to preparing food, it observed that he might simply “put food in the microwave” but said that was a choice he was making As to motivation more generally and particularly in relation to his hygiene needs, it observed that although drinking heavily at the date of the decision under appeal he was able to respond to priorities and obligations such as appointments, visits to his father and trips to the shop and that he would self-motivate, with respect to personal hygiene, “on the occasions when he felt it was necessary”
The judge in charge of the subsequent Upper tier Tribunal stated;
"It (The First tier Tribunal) appears to have taken the view that prompting was not needed for the majority of the time because when there was an imperative he was capable of acting. That seems to me to be too simplistic an approach. The mere fact that a claimant might be sufficiently motivated to perform a task when there is specific or unusual impetus to do so does not, of itself, inform as to the overall position and the generality of the situation.
So it is not appropriate to limit the scope of the enquiry to such days. True an ability to perform a task without prompting when there is particular pressure to do so might be indicative of a claimant simply exercising a choice not to perform such a task on impetus absent days but that will not necessarily follow. What has to be undertaken is a more general and all encompassing consideration.
So, there needs to be an assessment, in such cases, of why it is that, on days when a claimant does not perform certain tasks, he/she does not do so. If it is because, without any specific impetus, he/she is not motivated to do so as a result of health difficulties and that such days exist for more than 50% of the time in the relevant assessment period, then absent other pertinent considerations, the relevant descriptor or descriptors will apply. "
Ok, so what does this actually mean?
In a normal persons language, what all of the above words from the judge means is that; if a person suffers from health conditions that could cause them to have a lack of motivation or desire to do everyday things like washing, dressing and cooking/eating on most days, they can be awarded points in those activities if they need to be prompted or told to do them. (nothing groundbreaking or amazing there!)
However, sometimes people can be motivated to wash, dress and prepare food if they believe the reason for doing so is important enough.
Where assessors and Decision Makers are prone to making errors is in reasoning that if somebody does something sometimes, then chooses not to do so, they should not be awarded points, because they can do the task, they are simply choosing not to. This is incorrect if the person has a medical condition that could cause a lack of motivation or maybe a lack of self worth.
What the Upper Tribunal ruling means is that, a lack of motivation or reason to do something is not the same as simply deciding not to do it.
Therefore if you suffer from a lack of motivation to wash, dress, cook or eat etc more than 50% of the time, you can score points in any descriptor where it mentions needing prompting. If this is you, and you think that you should have scored points because of needing prompting because you lack motivation to do something some of the time, you should make reference to this piece of caselaw in your Mandatory Reconsideration letter or Court Submission statement (letter)
Using this caselaw could see you being a total of 6 points across the descriptors for washing, dressing and cooking. That means you are only 2 points away from a standard care award!
The BASE adviser team will be happy to answer any questions you have on this article or any other benefits questions that you need help and support with.
If you haven't already done so, please come and join our thriving online Facebook community where you will be able to meet the people that have brought you this article and ask them questions to your hearts content.
Join the Facebook community here: Benefit Advice Essentials