[2023] UKUT 151 (AAC)

The Appellant has complex mental health issues as well as musculoskeletal problems. On 20 June 2016 he made a claim by telephone for PIP. On 28 July 2016 the Appellant completed a PIP questionnaire (pp.17-49). On 19 August 2016 he was assessed by a health care professional (HCP). She recommended that the following PIP daily living descriptors applied: 1d (2 points); 3b (1 point); 4b (2 points); 6b (2 points); 9b (2 points) and 10b (2 points) (pp.67-94). The HCP also recommended mobility descriptor 2b (4 points). Based on that report, on 15 September 2016 the Secretary of State’s decision-maker scored the Appellant at 11 daily living points (and 4 mobility points) and so made an award of the standard rate of the PIP daily living component (pp.97-103), but with no entitlement to the mobility element. This PIP award was for a period of just less than three years from 12 October 2016 (the day after his previous DLA award had ended) to 18 August 2019.

On 26 September 2016 the Appellant applied for mandatory reconsideration of that decision (pp.106-109). He pointed out that a previous tribunal had awarded him the highest rate DLA care component and the higher rate DLA mobility component for a period until 25 October 2016. However, the outcome of that mandatory reconsideration process on 6 December 2016 was to make no change to the new PIP award (pp.110-116). On 22 December 2016 the Appellant lodged an appeal with the FTT. On his notice of appeal he argued that he qualified for the enhanced rate of the PIP daily living component and “at least” the standard rate of the PIP mobility component (pp.119-126). A written submission prepared on his behalf by Citizens Advice (pp.130-132) argued that he qualified for the enhanced rate of the mobility component on the basis of descriptors 1d (10 points) and 2b (4 points).

On 25 August 2017 the FTT dismissed the Appellant’s appeal against the decision of 15 September 2016 under file reference SC065/17/00006 (p.263), so confirming the award of the standard rate of the PIP daily living component for the period from 12 October 2016 to 18 August 2019 (pp.263-264). The FTT awarded 10 points for daily living and 4 for mobility, as explained in its detailed statement of reasons (pp.283-290). The Appellant then applied for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal. This application was refused by the FTT on 30 January 2018 (p.292) and, having been renewed, then again refused by the Upper Tribunal on 6 March 2018 (under what was then file reference CPIP/408/2018, now file reference UA-2018-000275). There appears to have been no further challenge to that decision.