Exceptions for a new determination that includes the mobility component for those above the relevant age

This section refers to individuals who are already in receipt of Adult Disability Payment (ADP) as opposed to applying through a new application.

When an individual is over the relevant age and a new determination is being made, there are restrictions on awards which include a mobility component. These are as follows:

The original mobility component award was for the standard rate

When the original mobility component award was for the standard rate the individual can only be awarded the standard rate mobility component, even when they would otherwise be entitled to the enhanced rate if they were under the relevant age.(ADP regs, Reg. 25 (3) (a) (i))

The individual can only be awarded the standard rate mobility component where the entitlement occurred due to the same condition/conditions on which the original award for mobility was made.(ADP regs, Reg. 25 (3) (a) (ii))

The original mobility component award was for the enhanced rate

When the original mobility component award was for the enhanced rate, the individual can only be awarded the enhanced rate mobility component where the entitlement occurred due to the same condition/conditions on which the original award for mobility was made.(ADP regs, 25(3) (b))

Determination without application when there is no mobility component in the original award

If a determination without application is being made for an individual over the relevant age and there is no mobility component in the original award, then the determination cannot include an award for the mobility component.

The only exception to this rule is in instances where medical evidence received after an individual reaches the relevant age is a clinical judgement that an individual has become terminally ill and is dated before the individual reached the relevant age.

If the original award has no mobility component, a previous award of ADP or Personal Independence Payment with mobility components can be used when Scottish ministers make a determination without application for an individual over the relevant age.

This previous award must have ended no more than one year before the new determination begins. The previous award would be regarded as the original award in these circumstances, and it would be subject to the restrictions in paragraph 25 above. ¹

Example: a determination without application due to a change in circumstances where the individual is over the relevant age and the original award included a mobility component at the enhanced rate

Application form

Rashid is over the relevant age and has muscular dystrophy. He is currently in receipt of an ADP award which comprises of:

• the daily living component at the standard rate
• the mobility component at the enhanced rate.

The case manager receives notification that Rashid’s circumstances have changed, and he may be entitled to further support. Increased muscle stiffness has led to further muscle restriction and as a result, Rashid has been diagnosed with depression, which has impacted his score when undertaking daily living activities.

A determination without application found that Rashid was entitled to the enhanced rate of the daily living component due to the change in his condition, and that he remained entitled to the enhanced rate for mobility.

Case manager’s decision

Rashid remains entitled to the enhanced rate for mobility in this instance because both the following are true:

• he received the enhanced rate of mobility in his original award
• his entitlement was due to the same condition (muscular dystrophy) on which the original award was made.

Example: a determination without application due to a change in circumstances where the individual is over the relevant age and the original award included a mobility component at the standard rate

Application form

Jakub is over the relevant age and received the standard rate of both the daily living and mobility components in his original award, due to arthritis.

Case manager’s decision

The case manager receives notification that Jakub’s condition has changed and makes a determination without application.

The determination found that Jakub is entitled to the daily living component at the standard rate due to his arthritis. It also found that Jakub would have been entitled to the mobility component at the enhanced rate. However, Jakub is over the relevant age, and his original award was for the standard rate of mobility. As a result, he was awarded the standard rate of mobility.

Example: a determination without application due to a change in circumstances because of medical evidence received, after the individual reaches the relevant age

Application form

Paul is over the relevant age and received the daily living component at the standard rate and the mobility component at the enhanced rate due to multiple sclerosis.

The case manager receives medical evidence from a healthcare professional to suggest that Paul’s condition has worsened and makes a determination without application.

The determination found that he is entitled to the daily living and mobility component at the enhanced rate due to multiple sclerosis.

Case manager’s decision

Paul is entitled to continue receiving the enhanced rate of mobility because both these statements are true:

• he was entitled to the enhanced rate of mobility for ADP in his original award
• the determination found the entitlement to be the result of the same condition that his original award was based on.

Example: a determination without application due to a change in circumstances where the individual is over the relevant age and a previous award is less than 1 year old is used to consider the mobility component

Application form

Jim is over the relevant age and received the standard rate of daily living component following a determination without application on 1 September 2020. Prior to 1 September 2020, Jim was receiving the standard rate ADP components for both daily living and mobility.

The case manager received evidence that Jim’s condition had worsened and carried out a determination without application in May 2021. The determination found that he had a limited ability to carry out mobility and daily living activities.

As the mobility component isn’t part of Jim’s current award, the case manager used the earlier award from before 1 September 2020 as his current award.  The case manager found that Jim’s entitlement to the mobility component was because of the same condition that he was receiving the standard rate for, prior to September 2020.

Case manager’s decision

The case manager completes the determination and concludes that Jim is entitled to both the standard rate of mobility and daily living components of ADP.