We welcome efforts to reduce unnecessary reassessments for people whose conditions or needs are unlikely to change. However, ESA/UC and PIP are different benefits with different purposes, and this must be reflected in any criteria for reassessment. The Department should adopt a version of the severe conditions criteria for PIP, effectively ending the need for reassessment as it does in ESA/UC. If this is achieved through the Severe Disability Group, which the Department is currently testing, ...

We welcome efforts to reduce unnecessary reassessments for people whose conditions or needs are unlikely to change. However, ESA/UC and PIP are different benefits with different purposes, and this must be reflected in any criteria for reassessment. The Department should adopt a version of the severe conditions criteria for PIP, effectively ending the need for reassessment as it does in ESA/UC. If this is achieved through the Severe Disability Group, which the Department is currently testing, the criteria must be developed to recognise the differences between ESA/UC and PIP, and not focus solely on a claimant’s ability to work. Type: conclusion | Number: 16 | Paragraph: 65 | Response status: not_addressed Government response: In PIP, for those with long-term (severe) conditions and with an ongoing award, the Department’s intention has always been to have a light-touch review, appropriate to the needs of the claimant, at 10 years. The Department has made progress with its plans to test