DBC Briefing
The PIP 20 Metre Rule
“The Personal Independence Payment (PIP) is a benefit that provides a cash contribution towards the
extra costs associated with an impairment or health condition. It provides support for those disabled
people with the greatest needs in overcoming barriers to live independent lives”
The above statement is a definition of Personal Independence Payment (PIP) taken from a DWP fact
sheet about the benefit. This briefing will set out a number of arguments, developed and supported by
the Disability Benefits Consortium (DBC), that demonstrate how the new ‘20 metre rule’ to qualify for
the enhanced rate of the mobility component of the benefit will, in reality, leave many – almost half a
million - of those in the greatest need without the financial support they rely on to live their lives.
The government is re-consulting on the criteria for the mobility component of the benefit, following
intense criticism and a legal challenge about the lack of consultation around the introduction of the 20
metre rule. The consultation1 is a vital opportunity for the government and MPs to properly examine the
impact of the policy and assess its validity.
What is the Disability Benefits Consortium?
The Disability Benefits Consortium (DBC) is a national coalition of over 50 different charities committed
to working towards a fair benefits system. Using our combined knowledge, experience and direct
contact with millions of disabled individuals and carers, we seek to ensure Government policy reflects
and meets the needs of all disabled people.
What is the 20 metre rule?
The 20 metre rule is the new distance that has been introduced for people to qualify for the enhanced
rate of the mobility component of PIP. It is less than the length of two buses, and differs from the
distance of 50 metres typically used to assess people for the upper rate of the mobility component of
Disability Living Allowance (DLA).
The PIP criteria state that only those who, ‘Can stand and then move more than 1 metre but no more
than 20 metres, either aided or unaided’ will qualify for the enhanced rate of the mobility component.
Individuals must be able to complete the distance safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and in
a reasonable time period, but can use aids such as walking sticks, crutches and prostheses.
The impact of the policy
The enhanced rate of the mobility component of PIP is worth £55.25 a week. Those that no longer
qualify (but still receive the standard rate) will lose £33.25 a week or, crucially, access to their
Motability vehicle. Government projections show that over 428,000 people will no longer qualify for the
enhanced rate of the mobility component of PIP by 20182
The DBC believe that the impact of this policy will include:
• Disabled people dropping out of work, education or volunteering activities
• Increased poverty and isolation of disabled people, with the associated risk of worsening health
• Rising costs elsewhere, such as unemployment benefits, the Access to Work Scheme, social care
and NHS
1
See https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consultation-on-the-pip-assessment-moving-around-activity
P54, The Government’s response to the consultation on the Personal Independence Payment assessment criteria and
regulations, December 2012, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/181181/pipassessment-thresholds-and-consultation-response.pdf.
2
The DBC believe that the use of the 20 metre rule is flawed. Below we will explain in detail our
reasoning behind this statement and provide examples of individuals who will be wrongly affected by
this policy.
Our view
It will always be extremely challenging to use a set distance to assess the impact of different
individuals’ ability to mobilise. Factors such as where people live have a substantial bearing on the
extra costs they face to maintain a reasonable level of independence.
However, we recognise that the department must find a workable solution in the context of the current
assessment. For this reason, we urge the government to reinstate the use of 50 metres to identify
those in the greatest need.
While this is not a perfect solution it is based on a degree of evidence to suggest that 50 metres is a
realistic measure to gauge whether a person is ‘virtually unable to walk’. The distance of 20 metres is
an arbitrary figure that lacks an evidence base and automatically discounts thousands of disabled
people who really do need the benefit the most.
We are concerned that the distance of 20 metres may have been set to restrict the size of the group
deemed to be ‘in greatest need’ and keep costs down as a result. We strongly reject this approach and
call on the government to introduce criteria that realistically identify those that fit into this group based
on the extra costs they face, not simply the amount of money deemed to be available.
20 metres as a measure of ‘extra cost’ is flawed
In evidence we have gathered from the disabled people we represent, many of those that can mobilise
for more than 20 metres (but less than 50 metres) face the same ‘extra cost’ as those that can only
mobilise for this distance. No longer qualifying for the enhanced rate of the mobility component of PIP
will have a devastating impact on their lives. We are particularly concerned about those that live in
rural locations with poor access to public transport or community schemes.
Quotes from disabled people who are likely to be affected by the 20 metre rule:
“In my opinion I can walk 20m with my crutches"but after the 20 metres when things start getting
really wobbly/slow/stiff etc etc, I wonder what I am supposed to do then? Getting onto a bus for
instance would be VERY difficult (if I lost my beloved Motability car which enables me to take my 4
year old to school and participate in a meaningful existence). The fact remains that I can walk 20
metres (aided). I just wonder what is the use of being able to walk 20 metres? If I can walk only 20
metres does this mean I can leave the house for 10 metres but then have to turn around and walk
back into the house? I doubt many people have a bus stop or train station within 20 metres of their
house therefore I just wonder where this idea of being able to walk 20 metres constitutes being
"mobile" enough to no longer qualify for a mobility benefit?”
“I live with Primary Progressive MS and severely restricted mobility in a rural location, miles from
shops/hospitals, and rely on my Motability car to live, as well as to 'have a life'. There are no bus
routes through our hamlet - nearest bus stop is over a mile away. 20 metres isn't far even in a town.
20 metres in the countryside is meaningless - have 'the powers that be' considered this?”
“If I lose this benefit I will be totally housebound. I am not able to walk as far as the nearest bus
stop or train stop. I could not afford to use taxis. I have no family or friends who live near enough to
chauffeur me around (nor could I expect them to do this). We could not afford to purchase a car,
and would not be able to get a loan to buy a car. I could not attend hospital or GP appointments, go
to the dentist, the library, the bank, the post office or to any social engagements. My life (and that of
my wife's) would grind to a halt, and life would simply not be worth living.”
The activities in the PIP assessment are designed as a proxy to identify the barriers that disabled
people face, and therefore the level of extra cost they might be met with. To our knowledge, and after
significant questioning of the DWP, no evidence was gathered by the department to suggest that 20
metres is a suitable point at which it can be deduced that the extra costs disabled people face start to
reduce, or even differ from those who can walk a shorter distance.
In addition, no impact assessment was carried out to establish how people currently receiving the
higher rate mobility component of DLA, but who may lose out under the new rule, would be affected by
this policy.
Cost will be pushed elsewhere
We have been overwhelmed with the response we have had from disabled people who are fearful
about the impact this policy will have on their daily lives. In particular, those that work, and those that
are worried about how they will attend doctor or hospital appointments. The mobility needs of these
people will not disappear, but are likely to be pushed to other areas of (potentially more expensive)
government spending, such as unemployment benefits, the Access to Work Scheme and social care. It
will also place significantly increased pressure on unpaid carers.
We also believe that there has been a lack of consideration of the impact of this policy on other areas
of government spending. A clear example of this are the recent reports that the Department of
Transport has had no discussion with the Department of Work and Pensions on the implications of PIP
reform on use of the Motability scheme.3 In addition, despite PIP being introduced from April 2013, the
DWP has issued no public information or guidance as to how PIP eligibility impacts on help from
Access to Work.
Quotes from disabled people:
“I work for the DWP and rely on my mobility payment through Motability to get to & from work. I still
work 34 hrs per week over 4 days. Without this component I will lose my car and rely on Access to
work to cover my taxi fares (I should qualify for this).This would mean the DWP paying £400 per
month in taxi fares as opposed to approx. £250pm for DLA. The present changes will cost the DWP
more money”.
“I was awarded the higher rate mobility component of DLA indefinitely in 2007 , I have a Motability car
and this has been my life line and allowed me to get out and about and enabled me to continue
working part time at the Jobcentreplus contact centre which is 10 miles away from where I live. If I
was not awarded the enhanced element of the mobility side of PIP I would lose my Motability car and
would be unable to continue working because I would have no transport to get to work as I would not
be able to run a car on my part time wage. I want to and need to keep working for as long as possible,
I don't want to sit at home staring at 4 walls feeling sorry for myself watching myself gradually get
worse. I can walk 20 meters with crutches and I use a wheelchair or my mobility scooter if I need to
go for example into town or anywhere were walking is involved. The Jobcentreplus contact centre
have been very supportive and are doing everything possible they can to keep me in work, so I don't
want to have to tell them I can no longer work due to a decision made by the DWP (my employer)
which has meant I am no longer eligible for a Motability car because I can walk 20 meters”.
The policy is inconsistent with government guidelines
A 50 metre benchmark distance is a well-established and research based measure of significant
mobility impairment – notably in relation to other disability benefits including DLA, the blue (disabled)
parking badge and in official guidance on creating an accessible built environment, including the siting
3
http://disabilitynewsservice.com/2013/06/minister-defends-lack-of-action-on-motability-pip-concerns/
of disabled parking spaces adjacent to public and commercial buildings. Indeed, in the notes to the
second draft of the PIP criteria, dated November 2011, DWP admits on page 61:
“50 metres is considered to be the distance that an individual is required to be able to walk in order to
achieve a basic level of independence...”
The introduction of the 20 metre measure has not been made as a result of any new research, and
directly contradicts the previously well-embedded distance of 50 metres.
Loss of access to Motability will be devastating
The loss of access to the Motability scheme as a result of the 20 metre rule is a particularly terrifying
prospect for many disabled people. Those that have contacted us refer to their car as a ‘lifeline’ - the
means by which they take part in everyday life.
In discussions with Motability we have been told that those who no longer qualify for the scheme will
be given the option to purchase their car, but typically these will cost in excess of £8000 - a sum far in
excess of the resources many disabled people will have available to them. Losing access to the
scheme not only means losing access to a car, but also the added benefits of cheaper insurance and
means of looking after the vehicle. Taking on these costs, even with a cheaper vehicle, will be
unmanageable for many disabled who are reliant on benefits to cope with the additional costs they
face.
In addition, the policy does not just apply to those who depend on a car. Those making new claims to
PIP who can only walk a very short distance – but even slightly further than 20 metres – will no longer
be able to access motorised scooters or electric wheelchairs from Motability either. Many of these
people will be confined to their homes. This is directly contrary to the government’s stated intention
that PIP exists to help people live ‘independent lives’.
Quotes from disabled people:
“My Motability vehicle is absolutely essential to my being able to still work as without it I cannot go
to meet with my customers in person or even get to a Post Office to send my goods to them. It’s
also my only means of getting to the shops for basics like food, soap etc. There is NO public
transport available within more than about 1/2 a mile of where I live! Without the Motability vehicle I
will be virtually housebound. I cannot affford to buy, maintain, insure etc any vehicle on my own”.
“Without the enhanced rate of PIP I would be unable to afford a car and would be confined to the
house and totally dependent on friends or family to get me out. My social life would be non-existent
and I would need to order an ambulance to take me to see my neurologist. I see him every 4
months. I am depressed enough at times but this would make it much worse. The current
uncertainty about PIP is also making me worse”.
“I cannot afford to buy an automatic car - they are just so much more expensive. I cannot possibly
walk the mile to the bus - what do I do? Stop working? Or work to pay the car loan off?”
How you can help
Please write to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith, and the
Minister for Disabled people, Esther McVey MP, to express your concern about the 20 metre rule, and
urge the government to reinstate the qualifying distance of 50 metres that was used for DLA.
For more information
If you have any questions please contact DBC Co-Chair Claire Nurden on 02084380753 or at
cnurden@mssociety.org.uk, or Georgina Carr, Senior Public Affairs Officer at the MS Society on
02084380750 or at gcarr@mssociety.org.uk .