Pip renewal result with no medical

My Partner has just had the results from his Pip renewal WITHOUT having to go through another medical.
As per the benefits and work guides, I treated the review form just as you would a new claim form, detailing all the difficulties that affects him and his ability to carry out that activity. Even if there were no changes from the original claim, I still explained for each descriptor hows it effects him now. (Thank you B&W for the advice)
He kept the same award as last time Standard Rate Care and Enhanced Rate mobility but with a longer award this time 4 years instead of 2, however, what is confusing is the makeup of the Mobility award.
He was part of the 1.6 Million people who had their awards reassessed last year and had his award increased from Standard Mobility to Enhanced due to the changes in descriptors for Psychological Distress and he was moved into CAT (F) Cannot follow the route of a familiar journey without another person, an assistance dog or an orientation aid. 12 points

However, in this review WITHOUT a medical, they have changed him to
(E) Cannot undertake any journey because it would cause overwhelming psychological distress to the claimant. 10 points
The reason he has kept his enhanced Mobility is because he also scores 4 points in the Moving around category, which then takes him over the 12 points required to receive the Enhanced rate.

It seems pretty pointless to ask for a mandatory reconsideration on the mobility component beings it still totals up to take him into the enhanced rate, but it is worrying how and why they could have changed the Category they placed him into, without a medical, especially since they say in the award letter that they reviewed his claim and all the medical evidence and reports supplied to them and they agreed that there had been no changes since his last award and there was unlikely to be any changes, hence the reason for increasing award period.
But I really do not like it, when something is inaccurate.

Thank you Gordon.

That is what is confusing though.

We wrote exactly the same in the review papers as to what we had written in the initial claim.

and yet as part of the 1.6 Million people who were reviewed, he was bumped up to Cat (F) and yet for his renewal was bumped down to Cat (E) even though the information supplied in renewal was same as original application.
So it was just very confusing how they could do this.
Like I said, it does not matter to that extent as he still gets enhanced rate mobility.
I just always worry about inaccuracies in regards to benefits though, in case it comes an issue later on with another benefit like ESA and you wanted to use Evidence from Pip

Interesting and frustrating at the lack of the consistency ( but not totally surprised!)- I've been given d, e and f on different occasions from the same medical evidence!