To think this “crackdown” on benefit fraud is absolutely pathetic

[MissLou0]

We lose hundreds of billions from tax avoidance compared to 1 billion on benefit fraud and nothing is done about it, because those are the Tory donors. Michelle Mone just stole £28 million from taxpayers for her PPE scam, she’s not in trouble, and she of course also hides her hundreds of millions offshore.

We lose a small amount from benefit fraud, and as a result everyone who claims any sort of benefit including disability benefits banks are going to be monitored.

The graph below doesn’t even scratch the surface of how much is lost to tax avoidance. For example Rupert Murdoch is worth £17 billion and he hasn’t paid tax in years, personal tax or on his businesses. And he’s ONE person. These people are not targeted yet the most desperate and vulnerable are.

This is completely ignored by the media as the majority of newspaper owners are hiding their money offshore.

I’m in a situation where I don’t need to claim any benefits but I have family who are disabled who have had to fight for even the tiniest amount to live on, and they are now having to deal with this invasion of privacy which will make not even 0.000001% of what cracking down on tax avoidance would.

This is absolute rubbish no one is checking what you spend your benefits on. The algorithm we I'll only flag a person up if they have over £16k in their bank account. If you haven't you have nothing to worry about. It's not like a person checking it's an AI algorithm.

I think you are getting paranoid. The algorithm will only flag you up if you have over £16k in a bank account. It's not looking at what you spend money on. The DWP might make mistakes especially human error but bank algorithms are less likely to make mistakes. If someone sent you £30 for Xmas no one would care if it didn't send you over £16k. No one thinks the majority of people are on the fiddle. However there will be a few who are. If they get caught that's a good thing because the benefits should be reserved for genuine cases. Just think for a moment. If a person is claiming benefits they have to show a bank statement when they first claim. If they inherit a lot of money but don't declare it because they don't want their benefits to stop, no one would know if there are no regular checks. It's to catch out people like that not ordinary people who have legitimate claims and not much savings.

I always think it interesting that there are two separate routes into getting a Blue Badge: via PIP (the automatic qualification based on mobility points), and via an application made directly to the Council.

The latter really does favour people who can obtain letters from their GP surgery, many of whom now charge for this service.

My GP charges a whopping £180 for the necessary detailed letter.

Unfortunately the social worker was right. When you challenge a PIP decision it goes to a different case worker/decision maker who may not agree with the original decision. They don’t just review the part you are challenging, they review the whole award. For example if you get a higher rate care award but nothing for mobility, and you challenge them because you think you have a case for mobility as well, you risk ending up with nothing if the new decision maker doesn’t agree with the care award.

I think that one of the best things that any claimant can do for themselves, or a relative/friend they're helping, is to find out if their GP surgery allows digital access to patients' medical records - they should do - and register. This means that at any point the claimant/patient/appointee can print out up-to-date copies of summary care or more detailed evidence.

This includes letters from hospitals, blood test results and scan results. Once you get the hang of it, it's all there, often behind a paperclip icon (for a letter) or another screen (for blood results).

And it's all free.

Sorry but this is incorrect. If you are on means tested benefits any money that comes into your bank account is supposed to be declared, regardless of whether it takes you over the savings threshold. It’s income. If Aunty sends you £30 for Christmas via your bank account it absolutely will be scrutinised and the algorithm would flag it up, benefit would be suspended and the claimant would then have to justify themselves to DWP’s satisfaction for benefit payments to start up again.

You clearly don’t know much about how the benefit system works. At present, anyone claiming income related (means tested) benefits can be asked for a bank statement at any time - DWP usually check claimants bank accounts on a regular basis by asking for bank statements periodically. The proposed system of a AI checking on a monthly basis will just replace that. And there are absolutely plans underway to check what disability benefit claimants spend their money on. The government is open about that. It’s most definitely ordinary people who will be caught out if they don’t properly understand the rules for claiming means tested benefits. As your post has very eloquently demonstrated.

I agree, but for disability benefits, a straight printout of GP records wouldn’t be much use. Benefit eligibility criteria is complicated and specific, and that’s why claimants ask for reports from GPs and consultants which are tailored to these criteria. It avoids any opportunity for DWP assessors to argue the toss if GP records are not specific enough.

Nope. Wrong on all points. The algorithm will flag up people who have over the savings limit. It will also flag up any payment receive into your bank account that you haven’t declared to DWP - means tested benefits require the claimant to declare anything they receive and DWP decides if it’s treated as income. The algorithm could potentially flag up something like birthday or Christmas gift money paid directly into a bank account and suspend benefit while it’s investigated.

And there are proposals - which the government openly admits - to look at disability claimants’ bank accounts to see what they spend their money on. This is allowed for in the Rights And Responsibilities agreement which claimants agree to as a condition of claiming benefits. Basically the DWP has the right to collect and share information regarding claimants with any agency they see fit.

Yep, that happened to a friend of mine. He was diagnosed with arthritis, along with ASD. He "rocked the boat" with his PIP, and actually lost money. He genuinely though he was going to get more.

GP record include copies of consultants' letters, fortunately - if you can get digital access. I hope most people can get this now.

In my own PIP claim, I knew I needed to build a watertight case.

I think before you say other people are spouting rubbish, then maybe check the facts yourself.
£16k in capital means you can not claim benefits. Your benefits actually start tapering off once you have £6k....

I read something similar, but nothing is confirmed - Hunt is staying tight lipped. Interesting if it does come to pass. In the days of DLA, a claimant could automatically qualify for the ESA support group and LCWRA payment just by qualifying for the higher rate care component of DLA. The Tories stopped that when PIP was introduced by changing the work capability assessment to include specific categories qualifying claimants for LCWRA. Interesting that they’ve come up with a way to reintroduce it now it’s more advantageous to them rather than the claimant.

I think this is all tied in to the work capability assessment. There are proposals to scrap it and just have the assessment currently used for PIP. It’s bonkers because PIP has nothing to do with the ability to work but the assessment does look at the level of disability present, so that has implications. The PIP assessment is also a lot harsher than the work capability assessment so it’s possible that they could assess for eligibility for ESA and PIP in one go, and base the proposed health element on that - I can see how that would result in a lot less successful claims if the dogs breakfast they’ve made of PIP assessments is anything to go by. But presumably - as with PIP - there would also be a lot more appeals, so difficult to know exactly how it would save money. Personally I think this is a sign that the conservatives are desperate in the run up to the election and looking for cheap and nasty policy to pull in more votes. And as usual benefit claimants get the crappy end because the British public too easily buy into the government narrative that they’re all cheats and layabouts.

Spot on. Not to mention that means tested benefits all require the claimant to declare anything that could be classed as income. So Uncle Ernie sends you fifty quid for your birthday via online banking. You forget to declare it, or don’t realise you have to. AI picks it up and stops your benefit until it’s sorted out. It’s going to catch a lot of people out. A lot of fuss and expenditure on chasing something that isn’t going to bring in much extra revenue when you compare it with what a similar crackdown on tax fraud could bring in. But that’s much harder and would affect the tories and their rich mates. So much better to paint benefit claimants as layabouts in preparation for squeezing them yet again.

I agree. But a copy of a consultants’ report isn’t necessarily going to help if it isn’t specific to what DWP are looking for. I do realise that a detailed report is going to be expensive, but a lot of claimants ask for them because it gives the opportunity to let the consultant know the type of information needed. I obtained mine by giving the consultant a copy of the assessment criteria so that his report was more relevant and left the DWP assessor no room for doubt or argument. It’s unfair because costs may be prohibitive, and strictly speaking DWP should obtain all the information necessary to make the best possible decision. But that ain’t gonna happen anytime soon !!

I've claimed means tested benefits of one form or another for over 20 years. I was asked for bank statements at the first application but I have never been asked for them again. I've not known anyone else have to submit bank statements periodically except when they've declared being over the £6k savings threshold and they need to check how much over they are.

Has anyone else been asked to submit bank statements over a long term claim except at the start?

And yet this time three years ago we in the mini Lockdown 2 with them swearing blind that it was all about the health. If thats the case why are they threatening people with loss of NHS prescriptions if they arent deemed to be looking hard enough for work.

All in it together right? Nah now its fucking obvious it was all about protecting our "betters" Which some of us could see three and a half years ago but is even more obvious now. I guess they cant make as much money from the illnesses people on benefits are being threatened over, as they could from Covid!!!!!

Not me. My experience is the same as yours. I was also never told that I had to declare every incoming (I just had some money off of a relative to help with dental costs... should I be declaring that?).
However, a lot of people are being called in for checks now. Some random, and some to do with people who applied during Covid. They are getting their spending scrutinised.

But the point is they don’t. They crack down on benefit claimants because they’re easy meat and they can sell claimants as layabouts and scroungers to the public, who lap it up. The government know how much they would save if they cracked down properly on tax fraud - and savings from benefit fraud pales in comparison. But they won’t. Three guesses as to why ?

The banks will notify DWP of large deposits into accounts receiving benefits payments. The DWP can forensically examine your account if they suspect fraud. They can do this before they start an investigation
I’m afraid the best place to keep any savings above £8000 is in a shoebox under the bed. That is if you are claiming benefits.

Several friends on ESA and UC LCWRA rates. All asked for bank statements every six months prior to Covid, but haven’t been asked since we returned to normal. My FiL was on income support prior to introduction of UC - had to submit bank statements every six months. He was pulled up by DWP because one of his bank statements showed a direct debit to a post office savings account he hadn’t declared. Benefit was suspended while they investigated. The tacit agreement for bank account checks between DWP and the claimant is already there - the proposed new measures are just an extension of that, and with AI will be easier and cheaper to implement.

This tory government know people on benefits aren't voting for them so dont mind shafting them.

And some of the middle class Covid zealots will be cheering this on
Absolute hypocrites

Yep. It would be like turkeys voting for Christmas !!

Has not been my experience, or that of the many people I know on ESA and LCRWA.
TBF, I can understand why your FiL was pulled up, as he was depositing into a savings account. But then there was a case of a lady who was pulled up for getting money from a "boyfriend". She was withdrawing her benefits from a PO counter in a McColl store.