AM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2024] UKUT 289 (AAC)
LB v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
25 October 2024
[2024] UKUT 338 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A man appealed a decision about his disability benefits (PIP). The first court didn't properly consider his pain and how it affected his ability to walk. The higher court agreed that the first court made a mistake and sent the case back to be decided again correctly.
Key Facts
- •Mr. LB appealed a First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decision regarding his Personal Independence Payment (PIP) mobility component.
- •The FTT awarded zero points for mobility, while Mr. LB argued his mobility was severely restricted.
- •Mr. LB's health conditions include anxiety, depression, carpal tunnel syndrome, diabetes, migraines, osteoarthritis, restless leg syndrome, and others.
- •The FTT considered Mr. LB's ability to drive, use public transport occasionally, and shop with his wife, concluding his mobility limitations were less severe than claimed.
- •The Upper Tribunal (UT) found errors of law in the FTT's assessment of Mr. LB's mobility.
Legal Principles
In assessing PIP mobility, the tribunal must consider whether the claimant can perform activities safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly, and within a reasonable time period, considering factors like pain.
Regulation 4 of the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013
Pain is a relevant factor in determining whether a claimant can perform an activity to an acceptable standard, even if they can perform the activity to some extent.
PS v SSWP [2016] UKUT 326 (AAC)
Outcomes
The UT allowed Mr. LB's appeal.
The FTT failed to make necessary findings regarding the duration of supermarket aisle walking, the need for repetition, and the impact of pain on Mr. LB's ability to perform mobility activities to an acceptable standard.
The FTT decision concerning the mobility component was set aside.
The UT identified errors of law in the FTT's assessment of mobility activity 2, and deemed a remittal necessary for fresh findings of fact on both mobility activities 1 and 2.