1,000 new PIP claims per day?

[flashbac]

Is this true? (From someone who is naturally cynical of government info.)

If it is, is there something else behind the statistic? Is it because people have to reapply or something like that?

This is from the government website:

"Monthly PIP awards have more than doubled since the pandemic, rising from 13,000 to 34,000 - a rate of around 1,000 new claims per day, or the population of Leicester every year."

I find the statistic unbelievable.

Yeah, I know. But perhaps it's about time the able-bodied started accounting for themselves instead of attacking us! Remarkable how many people seem to be on leave from their work this week, given all the able-bodied workers posting all day long on the subject of why we shouldn't have PIP.

If these posters put more energy into looking around their workplace, and seeing if, and how disabled people are accommodated, and if not, using their energy to do something constructive to help, instead of coming out with their usual unproductive noise, things might actually change for better outcomes for disabled people.

Exactly. The 1% are only the fraudulent claims that have been uncovered!

What is actually wrong with you? The phrase 'illegal boat people' is revolting, for one. For two, Starmer has literally pledged to cut the costs recently by ceasing to use hotels. For three, the % of GNI spent on asylum is 0.5. It is not this spend that is tipping the country over the edge. As a signatory of the Refugee Convention, we have a duty to help. And precisely £0 is paid to illegal immigrants.

Why do xenopobhic people have to shoehorn asylum into literally every conversation. It isn't one or the other.

The usual, shameless practise of punching down, going on. I suppose it takes away the attention of the real causes of the Country, not being in the best shape, such as a lot of employers not paying their staff enough to live on, which results in hard working people needing to be topped up by the taxpayer. But that is for another thread!

Partly an aging population and later retirement age. I know multiple people who now claim pip who used to work when younger and in better health. Admittedly 2 probably could work still.. but the pension age being later means many more are suffering ill health to some degree before being eligible for state pension.

Cutting use of hotels but instead paying silly money to landlords for them to accommodate asylum seekers in normal rented housing and/or holiday lets which is still going to cost a fortune that the taxpayer will have to pay. If we stopped them coming in and processed and deported them quicker, then we really would start saving money!

Illegal immigrants will generally either cost thousands while going through the legal process (they aren't just left to fend for themselves on the streets, and it's vanishingly rare for them not to attempt to claim assylum).
The ones who don't cost money are often the bigger concern though. Those are the cases either being exploited through sex work or similar, or involved in criminal activity.
There's going to be a vanishingly small amount of illegal immigrants not costing the government any money by remaining undetected and then also not either being exploited or harming others in order to achieve that.

I have no issue with people seeking asylum but I don't know how you can believe it costs the UK nothing to have people from other countries seeking asylum here.

Who pays for the staff managing the situation? Who pays for accommodation? Who pays for food? Who pays for the ESOL education

I'm not debating if they should be supported I'm debating the myth that is doesn't cost the uk

I'm disabled too. I understand a lot more than you think.

There are different degrees of cancer suffering. Perhaps I know more of them than you do? That doesn't make either of us right.

The thread is about the daily number of new claimants for disability benefit. My point is that there is such an increase in cancer diagnoses because the NHS is failing, failing people, and so long as there are debates and complaints about benefits, the government don't have to account for the failure of the NHS to cure people of disease, and since they pay so highly in national insurance for NHS care, they are unable to afford to go elsewhere, and although cancer patients are told they can have treatment in private hospitals and the NHS will pay for it, there is a problem there in that those with private medical insurance cannot get cancer treatment because their premiums don't run to it, and anyway the NHS has taken responsibility for that for decades.

Social history will tell you that cancer is on the increase, and fast getting out of control, and certainly beyond the NHS capability to cure or even treat it. There is a massive increase in the numbers of cancer patients, and that is hidden from the public against a panic scenario. It it was an infectious disease like polio, (that is an example, please don't rush to tell me I am wrong in that too) people would panic and demand action, and the government would have to inform the public so they can take the necessary steps.

If they did that with cancer there would be uproar, so those statistics are long in coming if at all.

Most people with cancer are awarded PIP, because of the long treatment programs many of them face. Either that or one of the other benefits like unemployment and sickness benefits(not for the self employed) or UC. They cannot live on air, can they?.

I am not saying thousands of claimants can work because they are not so physically disabled they need PIP. There will always be. Keynes said that a country needs people to be unemployed and able to manage on the bare minimum for a country's balance of payments to be healthy.

Now it is out of hand, but instead of saying why it is out of hand, the government is prevaricating on the whole topic of benefits.

Take this thread for example: 1,000 a day new claimants and what are the posts about? ADHD. Hundreds of posts moaning about ADHD and similar claiming benefits they don't need, with the occasional reference to physical disability.

Why?

What do you think treason is?

My opinion isn't relevant to a definition.

(the crime of) showing no loyalty to your country, especially by helping its enemies or trying to defeat its government

I think the point is - what do you think it is? You suggested that Starmer was guilty of treason. Possible the only thing he isn't guilty of. So isn't it up to you to say?

There were Muslim women at Glastonbury @llizzie .

I would bother to respond if (a) I had time and (b) I thought it worth trying to disabuse a racist rant of all the false information in this post.

I will settle with, I think it is about time we had a disagree button.

PS - I will just point out that there is no British constitution. Where on earth do you keep digging up these falsehoods?

I disagree
If it’s deemed apropriate to means test winter fuel allowance
( and let’s face it most on mumsnet thought it shouldn’t be paid at all and for those that did many thought the £30,000 threshold should be reduced.)

Then I don’t see why PIP should also be means tested

Neither the disabled or elderly chose to be as such.
There are costs to both conditions. If wealthy pensioners on over £30,000 don’t need the wfa of a one off £400 payment / year then wealthy disabled people should also be means tested.

The approx wfa bill / year is far lower than PIP.

Means testing is, I believe, a way forward. Although I appreciate is would need to be offset by admin costs.

nb. I haven’t bothered to use capitals but this doesn’t make the post less worthy of debate or reality.

Veering away from "boat people" conversations (🙄), the first condition listed on some document somewhere about my PIP is ADHD. It's alphabetically first and it's the condition I was first diagnosed with, so in those stats I presumably am considered one of the young (30 is still young 👀😅) people who has claimed PIP in the last few years and has been awarded enhanced for both, and on the face of it, I've been awarded it for ADHD.

I didn't even mention ADHD during my assessment interview; it was all about the impact of a brain tumour and epilepsy on my daily life - but ADHD still appeared first on the list.

I understand that the physically disabled might need a bit extra financially. I think my gripe is for people who claim PIP when they're feeling a bit anxious or low. I know many people personally and professionally that just exaggerate they're symptoms on the form or for whom the doctor signs off (because mostly they do as they don't want the hassle). Why do they need extra money when they're not disabled physically. Even if they need to get more cabs to get to work it can't amount to hundreds of pounds every month.

So are all health conditions that someone has included even if it doesn’t limit ability enough to get PIP? E.g. someone with M.E. may become depressed or grieve their previous life, but they wouldn’t be awarded PIP on the depression element, yet depression would still show in the stats?

It probably isn't.

For PIP the answer is yes. The DWP are being rather disingenuous when they trot out those figures because PIP isn't based on diagnosis. The form specifically asks "Include both physical and mental health conditions, even if they are not formally diagnosed. For example, if you experience anxiety, even if not formally diagnosed, you should list it and describe how it affects you." But it then goes on to ask about impacts (rightly) because that is what determines the degree of disability. I'd therefore be interested to know how (or if, and I suspect not) the DWP disaggregate that information for their statistics. For example, I have physical disabilities. I don't know anyone with severe physical disabilities who doesn't have anxieties (you should see how I have to plan a journey to a place I haven't ever been before to plan access!). But I do not have a diagnosis for anxiety and nor do I need one. It's a "side-effect" of what is wrong with me, not the cause. But I do wonder if somewhere in those stats I am listed as "mental ill-health" because I have truthfully answered a question even though in itself that is not the reason I am applying.

I think this is a strawman argument.

People aren't being given PIP for being 'a bit anxious or low' if they are exaggerating its fraud. Which is wrong and nobody thinks that should be allowed.

If someone has honestly presented thier symptoms. They have demonstrated that they have care needs and / or mobility needs that meet the criteria, regardless of the cause.

So if they met the criteria for standard rate mobility it would be £29.20 a week. A daily taxi to and from work would exceed that for many. That's like under £3 a journey. I dont quite understand the point criteria in mobility section as some sound similar to me but I think someine too depressed to go out would not reach 12 points for higher rate (but I could be wrong)

So are all health conditions that someone has included even if it doesn’t limit ability enough to get PIP? E.g. someone with M.E. may become depressed or grieve their previous life, but they wouldn’t be awarded PIP on the depression element, yet depression would still show in the stats?

All conditions are included in reports so I have always assumed they are included in stats as for some people they'll play a part in the totting up of points.

My DD is convinced she shows in stats for people receiving PIP for asthma and/or GERD as both as listed on her forms and it annoys her. Neither are remotely relevant to what she receives it for (Narcolepsy) and she wishes she could leave them off the form, but you have to include everything and they show on her prescription list

Similar situation to me.

My son does go to school, a mainstream one with an EHCP and 2:1 TA support so he can manage school but needs a lot of support.

He also constantly needs time off to attend regular appointments due to his medical needs.

DLA is a lifeline. It's the reason why we have a vehicle suitable for his wheelchair which means we can get to all of his appointments and don't have to fight with people who refuse to move their buggies on the bus.