Background
Background
The Appellant (to whom I will refer as the “claimant”) made a claim to a Personal Independence Payment (“PIP”) by telephone on 4 May 2023. On 3 June 2023 the claimant provided the Secretary of State with a completed PIP2 questionnaire and evidence in support of her claim to experience difficulties with both daily living and mobility activities. The claimant participated in a face to face consultation with a healthcare professional on 23 August 2023, who reported to the Secretary of State recommending the award of 4 points for daily living activity 9(c), but no other points under any other descriptor in Schedule 1 to the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013 (the “PIP Regulations”). On 3 September 2023 a decision maker for the Secretary of Stated decided that the claimant scored 4 points in respect of daily living descriptor 9(c) and no points in respect of any other daily living or mobility descriptors, and was therefore not entitled to any award of PIP from 4 May 2023 (the “SoS Decision”).
The claimant didn’t agree with the SoS Decision and requested a mandatory reconsideration. However, the SoS Decision was confirmed on reconsideration and the claimant appealed to the First-tier Tribunal.
On 27 August 2024, a three member panel of the First-tier Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) convened in Leeds to hear the appeal as a video hearing. Having heard evidence and submissions, the Tribunal dismissed the claimant’s appeal and confirmed the SoS Decision (the “FtT Decision”).
- Heading
- As the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of an error of law, it is SET ASIDE under section 12(2)(a) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (the “2007 Act” ) and the ca
- What this appeal is about
- Background
- The permission stage
- The positions of the parties
- Why I have allowed this appeal
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 307 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)