To be frightened about the Government’s plans for benefits reform?

[PilgorTheGoat]

I am one of the millions of people currently on long term sickness benefits. I receive the LCWRA element of UC and PIP due to poor mental health and autism. I have severe anxiety and depression and I am awaiting an appointment to see if I also have PTSD due to sexual abuse in my childhood.

I have tried every element of support offered to me. I’m maxed out on 2 different types of antidepressants. I have had back-to-back (excluding the 6 month wait in between) 12 week sessions of counselling offered via the NHS. I am on a waiting list for intensive CBT due to my possible PTSD. I am currently having twice weekly private, video counselling appointments.

I can’t leave my house alone due to panic attacks. I struggle to meet my own care needs and my husband has to do a lot of the work for us both (although he works full time). I have a very understanding friend whom I force myself to go for a short walk with twice a week in order to stop myself becoming completely imprisoned at home but I find this very distressing and we have to take the same route each time.

I am so, so scared about the government’s plans to end sickness benefits for people like me. We don’t have a load of spare cash, we’re just about getting by. There is no support available. I’ve taken everything offered and my husband has been very proactive in seeking out other services for me to be involved with. I’d love to be better, I’d love not to live in fear but there is no help.

But if you can start stacking payments, then you're quids in.

I ran an imaginary claim through the benefits calculator and a family or four in private rented accommodation, with one parent working 40 hours per week for minimum wage, got the same take home money as a teacher at the top of the pay scale in London (the teacher has to pay into the pension scheme, so would actually take home less money).

Now stack carer's allowance for the mum and 2x PIP claims for the kids and what's that 'wage' looking like?

You have to be realistic about how big an incentive it is to claim for these things.

There are websites that coach people in what to say to get payments:

https://adhdembrace.org/funding-and-benefits/#:~:text=Disability%20Living%20Allowance%20(DLA)%20helps,child%20at%20his%2Fher%20worst.

"Disability Living Allowance (DLA) helps with the cost of caring for an eligible ADHD child, under 16 years of age, needing extra looking after and having had these difficulties for at least three months. Just describe your child at his/her worst. Do not understate the problems and be particularly be clear about night-time issues e.g. incontinence, difficulty going to sleep, waking up all the time, tantrums, fits, lack of sleep, etc. (the higher benefit care rate for DLA is only paid for those with night time problems). It will aid you to obtain a Disability Register Identity Card for your application."

Don’t you just love posters who claim to know every aspect of a claimants’ life in so much detail that they think they’re entitled to decide whether or not they are eligible for benefit ?

The idea of additional or hidden disability is alien to them. My own feeling is that if someone is claiming sickness or disablity benefits then the reason for that is between them, their medical advisers and the claims assessors at DWP. They will have been scrutinised and assessed and will have medical evidence or a face to face assessment to support their claim, and if they’ve been awarded benefit as a result, then they’re clearly eligible. It’s really no-one elses’ business. As an ex benefit adviser I’ve never been a fan of the ‘shop a scrounger approach’ because I’ve seen so much hardship caused by malicious and mistaken reporting of people who are not doing anything wrong.

Jealous of some poor sod with a “gammy” leg. How did you access his medical records?

"Given your brothers situation how do you feel about the revelation that a scheme such as you mention was recently axed, just as getting people into work who have challenges are being focused on?"

I thought that a previous idea where employers could pay below minimum wage to the disabled, and have the wage topped up by the taxpayer, was exactly what was needed for people like my brother.

That idea was killed by the Guardian and BBC screaming that it was devaluing disabled people and treating them as 'lesser' / exploitation.

She didn’t. She’s clearly one of those people for whom ‘hidden disability’ doesn’t exist. If you can’t see it, it’s not there. And the comments about living in a nice area and not being acquainted with certain phrases is suggestive of something amiss somewhere.

That scheme would involve the tax payer in the form of the top up benefits tho wouldn't it. I don’t think it’s the cost to the tax payer that’s your main “concern”. I think what you’re after is some form of “punishment”

For sure. I’m thinking chip on shoulder

Nobody wishes to address the problems associated with websites coaching parents with what key things they need to say in order to claim the higher rate PIP for kids. Things that can never be verified because they're happening in the home at night-time.

Instead it's just the standard personal abuse.

No idea why some are means tested and some aren’t. Maybe it’s just to do with the cost effectiveness of assessing the numbers claiming.
I had no idea what ESA was but thanks to your post I’ve just googled it.
No wonder claimants find it all so confusing and lots never claim.

Wow
Thats a shocker
The problem with these sorts of advice websites is that they give the real claimants a bad name.
Seeing that I can understand the scheptism.

I am not sure why everyone is finding that ADHD website paragraph stuff so controversial. It isn't coaching. It's not telling people to lie. It is saying that if your child has that list of problems make sure you talk about them in the claim as it is those that the assessors take seriously. It's not saying to pretend your kid has those issues when they do not.

One way to curb some of the extra claiming would be more direct payments

A family friend gets benefits for ADHD for a child, one of the reasons given it's needed is to pay for extra tuition for school etc. Now that seams reasonable so I asked how the child was doing with the extra lessons. Guess what non sought for the child.

Now if the school were given the extra money as a pupil premium then it would allow the school to support extra tuition and stop some claiming for the extra money.

My DM also at 88 was able to claim for mobility which was suggested was for using taxis to get her out and about. She never used any taxis and would wait ages for hospital transport etc. Why was this money not allocated like the bus pass and paid direct to taxi companies?

This might help reduce the benefit bill without stopping things for people most in need

The websites, charities and CAB etc that "coach" people to get benefits they are entitled to do so to try and avoid the rigmarole of having claims turned down then having to go to tribunals or final court assessment, which, incidentally, all cost extra money to the tax payer to administrate. People routinely minimise their circumstances for a variety of reasons, including lack of self awareness (mental health related), shame and embarrassment.

How would you propose assessing night time needs other than self reporting? Happy to see armies of assessors spending a week in the homes of claimants to get a full picture to your standards? Because of course that would be yet another outsourced use of tax payers money, far in excess of the sums being claimed.

And get the extra staff from where? How do you decide what's a disability related cost?

So exaggerate and get money you’re not really entitled to so you don’t have to go to tribunal and exaggerate there instead?

Now if the school were given the extra money as a pupil premium then it would allow the school to support extra tuition and stop some claiming for the extra money.

@LiquoriceAllsort2

Yes I think that this is one of the things that the government is looking at - investing money in services instead of giving it to individuals.

That would cost far more in admin to sort out.

It is all too much now. There are some very unpleasant undertones to some posts. I am not sure what they are trying to achieve. What a way to take things up a notch. It is beginning to come across like some bad satire.

@LiquoriceAllsort2

Careful - you've mentioned people that you know personally, so will be accused of fabricating them and their situations.

I agree that paying money directly to claimants isn't necessarily in the claimants best interests - your friend's child didn't benefit from a tutor and your mother probably didn't want to 'waste' the money on taxis, despite the benefits that would have provided.

My son is suspected of having ADHD. The school arranged for somebody from the Borough to come in and assess him. He's only 4 and sleeps through the night. We're hoping he learns to manage things like sitting on the carpet a bit better as he matures.

I think the school will receive a pupil premium if he is officially diagnosed as having ADHD.

My wife and I both earn decent money, and I've no intention of putting in a claim for DLA/PIP - but, if I do ever decide to make a claim, I now know exactly what to put on the form to get the higher rate award.

Same as you do now but more paid direct so they are used for the reason given. No extra staff needed as schools would just include in pupil premium and councils would add with bus passes.

I am just putting things out there as ways to reduce the bill.

I wouldn't pay anything for those cases, because I don't see why money is required for the things listed by that website.

What exactly is the money for? Persil to wash the sheets? £800 p/m?

You don't have to give a breakdown of what you will spend your money on to PIP to get PIP so no not the same as you do now

I think there’s something to be said for the fact that it does devalue disabled people and it’s contrary to the Equality Act, so could be seen as discriminatory. It’s also massively open to abuse.

The coalition government scrapped sheltered workshops like SRJ and Remploy saying that they were no longer relevant. I disagree. I think in a closed setting, regulated and closely scrutinised, paying disabled people less than those working in open industry could work. But I think they would have to be paid pro rata for the actual work that they do - in other words for output - rather than a separate lower minimum wage applying specifically to disabled people. Putting the sheltered workshop environment into an open employment setting would be open to abuse and you can just imagine discussions similar to this one, denigrating lazy work shy disabled people being paid to do less at the expense of the tax payer !! Which is essentially what Iain Duncan Smith said about Remploy, prior to closure.

So why do you need extra staff for direct payments?

You getting assessed just like now but if you need say mobility you have a bus pass that can be used for taxis

My DM with her mobility money she never used was saved in cash every month and eventually went to us in her will.. fine for us but not good for the countries finance. How many more will be like her?

It may also stop the people being accused of shirking for the extra money as if they were getting a taxi pass instead of money they may not be so keen to apply

They are not ‘coaching’ people. They are advising people as to the best way to complete the application for a fighting chance of securing benefit. So what problems do you think there are with giving advice - CAB and lots of other bona fide organisations do it and the DWP themselves advise people to seek advice and help in filling in the forms before submitting them. And it doesn’t matter whether the things they say are happening in the home, at night or anywhere else, if they meet the criteria for the award of benefit and are supported by medical evidence the claim will be successful. If not, it won’t.