In 2004, a year after I suffered a traumatic brain injury, I was introduced to the benefit system. I was recently discharged from a twelve-month period in hospital – I was still quite poorly with hidden disabilities. My wife filled the extensive disability living allowance (D.L.A) forms out – just tell the truth – she was advised. A month or so later we had the award letter saying I did not qualify. Perplexed as to why I was rejected we contacted my social worker – she then took us through the appeals process.
Sitting one side of a huge table with four appeal professionals sitting opposite, I had my wife one side of me and on the other side my social worker. The appeal professionals, one a retired doctor, another a social worker and I cannot recall the two other professions, the appeal process began. We discussed the questions in the D.L.A forms and my answers were the same as what my wife put. At that time, I struggled to describe how my brain injury affected me, but the retired doctor guided me through.
The pressure was unbearable and at one point I broke out in tears – my wife and my social worker both comforted me and the appeal professionals recognising the stress I was under paused the meeting. My appeal came to an end and I was told I would hear from them within a month. A month later I received my appeal judgement and the original decision was overturned and I was awarded D.L.A for life.
A decade later a letter came through the post telling me D.L.A was being replaced by a personal independence payment (P.I.P). I was told to reapply to receive this award. The forms came through – a little less padded than the D.L.A and again my wife filled them out as honestly as she could. I was then invited to an interview with a P.I.P assessor. My wife accompanied me to the appointment.
We entered a small dimly lit room with a young male assessor. He told me he had worked in mental health for several years to which I replied – good, you’ll be able to understand my brain injury. I left the assessment extremely tired but rather dazed to what I had just experienced.
It was only a few weeks later when the award letter arrived, I realised why I was feeling dazed – everything in the assessment conclusion letter was a blatant lie – I wasn’t bothered that I had been declined – I felt demoralised and degraded. I revealed to the assessor some of my most intermit moments.
As I was reading the assessment I felt as though I had been contradicted with some of the information being made up. It was this moment I realised I had been interrogated not assessed. This sent my mental state of mind tumbling into an abyss of depression – you can appeal, I was told. How can you appeal blatant lies, I thought; and did not appeal.
Robert Ikins is another person who suffered mental agony switching from D.L.A to P.I.P. He also has a hidden disability – bipolar disorder and a personality disorder. The switch also meant he lost his payment and he report’s the process “unfair and very, very stressful.”
Robert’s appeal process took eighteen months and he report’s feeling like he was trial rather than a person with mental illnesses. Eventually wining his appeal, by the time he received his payment and back pay he had already lost his home and was self-harming. His award was only for two years, resulting in him reapplying for PIP a further two times. On each occasion the result has been the same – declined and overturned at an appeals court. Each time he goes through this process he has received a great deal of support from Disability Solutions – and because they have had their funding drastically cut, he expects the PIP system to be twice as cruel post COVID-19.
Kay suffers every day with diagnosed physical and mental disabilities. Kay relies on her P.I.P award so she can live an independent life. Face-to-face assessments are conducted at her home due to her condition. Describing the process, she too feels like she was being interrogated having to explain her most harrowing aspects of her mental health.
Kay reports of the concluding letter being “hypocritical” and “falsely concluding” she has no problem. During her first assessment she tells of the assessor’s demeanour being “sharp” and “rude.” This made her feel an imposter in her own home – and that she did not deserve any award. Feeling dejected at thought of her being declined she suffered huge anxiety awaiting the result. Every time she goes through the process she gets severely knocked back for months and feels an outsider, in a society that does not care.
Philippa Day was a 27-year-old mum. A BBC News article dated 28 January 2021 reports of her tragic death from suicide where benefit errors were a ‘predominant factor’. Phillipa had a personality disorder and type 1 diabetes. An inquest heard how she called the Department of Work and Pensions to explain she was “starving” due to her income dropping from £228 a week to just £60. This loss of income was due to her P.I.P being stopped after a form she sent in went missing.
Coroner Gordon Clow told the court her mental health problems were “exacerbated” by the benefits process. In total, the coroner found 28 errors were made managing her case. This included Capita not acting on information from Philippa’s community psychiatric nurse. The C.P.N informed Capita of the risk to Philippa’s health a face-to-face interview would cause. Mr Clow directed both the D.W.P and Capita to review the assessment process so it does not “create unnecessary distress”.
In the BBC article, Capita made the following statement – “We have strengthened our process over the last 18 months and are committed to continuously working to deliver a high-quality, emphatic service for every claimant”. Speaking of Philippa’s tragic death, the DWP said – “This is a deeply tragic case. Our sincere condolences are with Miss Day’s family and we will carefully consider the coroner’s findings.”
31st January 2019 Capita, the company that that delivers P.I.P for the Department for Work and Pensions was awarded a two-year contract extension worth £112 million. Capita explains that P.I.P helps people with a long-term condition or disability lead independent lives, by providing additional financial support.
In an article from ShareCast dated 31st July 2019, it is reported the contract extension was awarded even though the data suggests more than a third of assessments were significantly flawed. Campaigner John Slater under the Freedom of Information act discovered in 2018, 17% of assessments were such poor quality the DWP said “learning required” of the healthcare professional who wrote it – and that because of serious flaws 16% needed amending but were still deemed acceptable.