To dob in family member - benefits

There have been recent threads discussing Euthanasia of disabled children
And on any thread where a poster is struggling with caring for their disabled child, the knee jerk reaction from many poster ,s is to just send the child away to live in a mythical residential setting.

DWP are actually moving towards this. They are phasing out anonymous reporting to eliminate malicious reports which waste time and andversely affect claimants. In the near future you will have to give personal details when you report, and will be held responsible if it turns out to be malicious.

People confuse participation in society with economic contribution. People who work in the tobacco industry might make an economic contribution but they have a negative impact on society. Just like people who run online porn businesses - lots of money, no social good.

Some of these replies are beyond medieval and almost dickensian. Next they’ll be saying that people should be institutionalised in Bedlams. A dear friend was a conjoined twin. Only part of her twin had withered and the midwife, recognising there would be years of surgeries ahead, and survival being iffy, suggested that her mother might want to pop her baby by an open Window and enjoy the cool December air…

60 years later, and yes most of her teens in and out of Great Ormand Street, she is in her 60s’ with 2 children. Missing some of her spine/coccyx has meant there are issues but she is still here, living a meaningful life. But I wonder how many PPs here would have happily popped her naked by the window to save the tax payer some money?

ETA just to add, she has never claimed benefits - even ran her own business for a long time, but I suspect the NHS funded operations (half a dozen with leading international specialists) that she received cost the tax payer a hell of a lot more than the average PIP claimant does in 10 years.

Bloody hell! My husband is disabled and struggles to walk, but he still does it as if he doesn't it makes his condition 10x worse. Do you want to grass on him as well because he does the school drop offs while I am at work?

This. Absolutely. Many posters missing the point here that this is exactly why PIP is paid. As I said upthread, the clue is in the name - personal independence payment.

The application of benefit is not decided on a black and white assessment of whether a claimant can participate or not, it’s the degree to which they can participate and whether they can do so better if supported by PIP.

As an example, someone upthread mentioned a claimant saving their benefit for holidays. This is a perfectly acceptable use of the benefit because someone with a significant mobility problem or even mental health issues would probably face increase costs in accessing holiday facilities because of access and accommodation suitability. Likewise many claimants save their benefit to be able to afford better personal care, better aids and appliances and access to better mobility products.

There is a fundamental lack of understanding or appreciation of what disability actually means here, and a complete lack of why PIP is paid. It’s nothing at all to do with the ability to work - it doesn’t assess for that at all and some of the replies are knee jerk, over simplistic and ableist.

Very well said. Instead of turning on each other, how about we, as a society, look at whete the real 'grifting' is, as its not a tiny % of people who you think are using 'dole poles' (as I've charmingly heard recently) to expensively rent mobility cars.

If you can participate you can contribute.

There are two ways to view that sentence. The first is that you actually believe it, you think that if you want to participate in society you should make some sort of, presumably financial, contribution. In which case you're suggesting that disabled people who can't do that should be isolated, prevented from taking part in society.

The second is that you've not thought about what you're saying for a single second. Ever worked with profoundly disabled people? I have, and with support they could go out to restaurants, to social activities, to classes, on holiday. Could they have "contributed" by going to work or volunteering? Not at all. Their lives were still meaningful and valid, however much people like you would argue to the contrary.

And this is the crux of the matter right here. The DWP and tribunals service not only have a duty to deliver accurate decisions based on proper assessment of the claimants’ condition, but they need to ensure that that decision is correct in law, and that’s where the basis of tribunal decisions lie.

There are safeguards applied to each element of the assessment. For example, as has been pointed out here, the decision on whether someone qualifies for higher rate mobility is based on the 20 metre rule, but alongside that rule there are mitigations which legally have to be applied. It’s not just a matter of whether a claimant can walk 20 metres, it involves other factors relating to safety, reliability/repeatability and timescales among other things. If these are not sufficiently considered, then the decision doesn’t stand in law, which is why so many decisions are overturned at tribunal.

In many cases DWP have been criticised at tribunal because they don’t seem to have much regard for their own rules and regulations and ensuring they are legally sound. That posters think they have the ability to challenge decisions made by tribunals and report claimants for simply not looking disabled enough is breathtakingly entitled.

Indeed and its crap they come out with like they think the advisors and judges are gullible fools who believe anyone that tells them they are disabled just on their say so.

Exactly just like if you make any other type of legal challenge and lose. A judge has already made a decision in these cases. So many people think they know better than the judges.

Or have to pay towards the cost of the pointless investigation.

There can be many reasons. Part of my health issues are underlying, made worse by foul ups by the NHS over the years. 🙄

No, many people can’t access decent housing, and don’t eat healthily. For various reasons.

But, what bugs me about these threads is that so many of those that criticise, and have most to say, would fall apart if they had to “live the dream” of either having severe health problems, or having to care for someone with severe health problems.

I’ve done both. I’ve paid taxes since I was 16. So, as far as I’m concerned the self righteous lot can sod right off. Walk a mile in my shoes. 🙄

Either way, disabled or carer, it’s 24/7 - and I’d gladly take being healthy again over my amount of DLA.

"There is nothing immoral about questioning whether a significant chunk of state resources should go to supporting someone who is well enough to socialise regularly and is able to participate in society. If you can participate, you can contribute."

My DH has been left with severe walking and balance difficulties following cancer treatment. He is entitled to PIP. He also works full time from home and pays tax.

Imo, if we are spending a significant chunk of money on sickness and disability benefits, we should be looking at why so many are sick or disabled rather than punishing people who need extra support.

Do people have access to adequate health and social care? (No)
Do people have safe and secure housing? (No)
Do people have the means to access a healthy and nutritious diet? (No)

She has been to Tribunal and they awarded it. That is the end of it. It has nothing to do with you.

I participate.

I contribute.

I also claim PIP.

Well, I’m retired so work or not isn’t an issue, although PIP is not an out of work benefit anyway.

But, I pay taxes on my private pensions, and claim no means tested benefits/top ups etc. I pay my full rent and bills etc.

I wonder how you expect me to live though. Should I just stay indoors waiting to die or what?

Yes, I go out, and yes, I socialise. When I can, and with the help of cabs etc.

I’ve worked in benefits, I’ve worked in advocacy, and I know that tribunals will always fully study the health records of anyone that has to attend a tribunal.

The largest fraud in benefits/top ups is with housing allowances, and some claiming to live alone when they have a partner there on the sly.

Perhaps it’s better to leave disabled people be, and sort out that expensive fraud. 🤷‍♀️

What an appalling attitude YOU have. What a massive, over-judgemental over-reaction. There is nothing immoral about questioning whether a significant chunk of state resources should go to supporting someone who is well enough to socialise regularly and is able to participate in society. If you can participate, you can contribute. The real question is why you have such a strong emotional reaction to this question. Did it hit a nerve, I wonder.

As a disabled person, I'm often reminded that many people don't agree with you.

Funnily enough, these people never want to switch circumstances.

Maybe there should be a rule that if you are a busy body who reports disability fraud and it turns out that nothing is wrong you should be publicly named. People do all sorts of scummy stuff when they are anonymous.

Nope. Entirely wrong on the physical disability and walking distance. 20 metres is a guide. It’s entirely possible for a physically disabled person to be able to walk much further than 20 metres and still qualify for higher rate mobility. It depends many things, including on the degree of difficulty they have, and the ability to repeat it as often as necessary, as well as the time taken and the cumulative effects.

This reminds of a someone commenting ‘don’t you feel guilty using OUR tax money to celebrate Christmas’ on a clearly disabled persons tiktok
Disabled people are allowed to live and god forbid even enjoy life

Spot on.

Firstly PIP has nothing whatever to do with the ability to work.

Secondly, if your friend was demonstrably fully healed then her PIP would have been stopped when it came up for review, at which point she would have been required to produce evidence of ongoing disability and probably be interviewed.

Thirdly, you work colleague isn’t doing anything wrong. PIP isn’t means tested and how he spends it is his business - absolutely nothing to do with his eligibility. Some disabled people save PIP for better equipment/wheelchairs and some save for holidays because on average it costs disabled people more to go on holiday because of access a mobility issues that have to be catered for. Which is EXACTLY what PIP is for. The clue is in the name. Personal INDEPENDENCE payment.