To be sick of all the newspaper articles saying lies about DLA and PIP

[elliejjtiny]

To get any DLA or PIP you have to be significantly disabled. To get the higher rate of either part you have to be severely disabled.

A motability car is not free, it's rented. To get one you need to either be unable to walk 50 metres or have a severe learning disability, which is very difficult to get.

It's always happened but since the stuff in the news about changes to PIP it's got worse.

Articles in the newspapers claiming you can get a free car for bed wetting, which just doesn't happen. There will be children like my ds who get DLA because they have a number of problems including bedwetting but nobody gets high rate mobility for bed wetting on its own.

There are other articles about people claiming PIP and DLA for various minor sounding conditions and I am so fed up with it. I know from experience that the newspapers will have talked to people claiming PIP/DLA and twist everything they say to make them sound like a scrounger.

All these articles are giving off the message that anyone with any minor disability can claim loads of benefits.

Shut down conversation? Can you show me where I did that? No, thought not. Expressing an opposing view isn't the same thing as trying to shut down conversation.

But how would they prove it's higher? I know personally of two people who are getting high rate DLA for their kids who have lied on the forms. And these are significant lies too.

I'm partially sighted and was told I should apply for PIP and that I would get a supporting letter, however having looked at the application forms I'd have to lie a lot to actually get it, but how would anyone know I'm lying if I've got a supporting letter?

I know people who PREVIOUSLY couldn't walk that far but now can walk for hours and do wild activities that most able bodied people would struggle with who still get the same rate and car.

Not everyone on pip is scamming, obviously! But some are. I don't know why people don't believe it's possible.

Completely agree. Most people are genuine and having claimed PIP for my son I know you have to provide a fair amount of evidence. However I also know two people that that get PIP mobility that absolutely do not qualify. One is an 18 year old boy, he can walk more than 50 metres and he can definitely make and plan a journey independently. He has a minor kidney problem. He had free lessons and has a has a motabiiity car. He drives all over the country independently as does a competitive sport. He does not do any type if work or education. I just cannot figure it out.

@northerneast I can't speak for others but the person I referred to has lied. They proudly showed me a copy of their paperwork and letters received from the DWP.
As I've stated a paper based assessment was allowed in this instance. This person won't be an anomaly.
Fraud is possible with PIP. The whole basis of this specific application is ficticious. The facts could easily have been checked if the DWP made minimal enquires, checked medical records or even had a quick look on social media.
It's tempting to do the exact same as this person via a fresh application but I want to receive what I'm entitled to, not make fraudulent statements.

I've been thinking all day and im 99.9% certain im going to report my family member after all.
For every person who lies and is successful, there is another person out there fighting to get what they are entitled to and being refused.
Any forthcoming changes will be detrimental unless the liars are exposed and their money stopped. The govermment are only interested in the bottom line after all.
I will do it tomorrow - morally I have to.

It is not all funded by the taxpayer. You pay a deposit for the more expensive cars, we’ve paid almost 10k over the years for these “free” cars. It makes no difference to the taxpayer what kind of car is leased. If I get a Skoda Fabia I pay no advance payment and motability gets my PIP, part of which goes towards the servicing and maintenance and part goes to the dealer. The car is auctioned off after 3 years by the dealership and they make a profit. If I get a Mercedes from the dealership, I pay an 8k deposit, motability gets my PIP and after 3 years the car is auctioned off. Cost to the tax payer is the same.

The purpose of the scheme is to help disabled people to have access to a vehicle. Why do you think disabled people should be forced to settle for a low standard of vehicle if the cost to the taxpayer is the same?

An Independent audit of DWP showed fraud is practically non existent in PIP. It’s over 10% in universal credit though, surely we should go after that first.

The number of children in poverty in Scotland has not fallen since the introduction of this policy. The payments don’t pay for themselves, they are paid for by the increased taxes Scotland has levied. I pay about 2k per year more in tax because I live in Scotland. I’m happy to pay more tax if it benefits children in Poverty, but it’s misleading to say the payments re self funding.

Even the dwp admit that fraudulent claims of PIP are below 1%. I don't understand how the government are justifying their actions.

People don’t seem to have a clue about it
occupational health suggested I drop to 16hrs work a week. I said “but who will pay my mortgage?”
She suggested PIP or ESA
ESA isn’t enough money and I have no clue if I would be entitled, I’m not unwell enough to get PIP

I do think it needs an overhaul somehow as it’s not working but mostly because people who should be getting it aren’t. There’s also no help if you’re too sick to work FT but don’t fall within the very narrow definitions within the PIP qualifiers

Also sick of people acting like somehow health conditions are a failing or a choice and it’ll never happen to them
Or being told I can improve my immune system when I physically can’t do anything about it. Pretty sure haematology would have told me to take a vitamin if it would actually help

I hate the ‘free car’ thing. I have an upper limb difference, but my mobility is fine so obviously I don’t have a car via Motability- I have to pay for my car like any able-bodied person. But because it has a steering wheel adaptation- which, by the way, costs over £1000 and which I have to pay for myself- I’ve had people assume I’ve got a ‘free’ car!
These cars aren’t free for a start, people exchange part or all of their mobility allowance for the car.
And clearly I can walk as well as anyone, so why the heck these idiots think I’m getting a ‘free’ car is beyond me.

My son gets high rate DLA and you need significant evidence to back up what you write on the forms by medical professionals.

I agree. A MacMillan advisor told me not to bother with PIP as it’s very difficult to be considered eligible.

I do think that there are still people taking advantage of the benefit system though.

Oh, please🙄
That’s just ridiculous and is exactly the sort of rubbish that is peddled in the tabloids that the OP is highlighting. Being deaf in one ear isn’t a mobility issue so they wouldn’t qualify for a higher rate mobility component of benefit, that’s if they qualify for any disability benefit at all, and you can’t have a motorbility car if you don’t get the relevant benefit.
Nobody gets a motorbility car ‘just’ because they’re deaf in one ear.

How do they know how many fraudulent claims there are? If they know about them, why don't they stop them?

What is the difference between a "free" car and someone exchanging their Motability allowance for the car?

A ‘free’ car would be one that costs the disabled person absolutely nothing. They’d get it AS WELL AS their benefit money.
If they’re giving their benefit money up in exchange for the car, then it’s not free, is it. They are giving up a portion of their income to pay for/lease the car. In the same way anyone else gives up a portion of their income to pay for or lease a car.

But their benefit money is free as well.

If someone gives someone the choice of a prize of an amount of money or a car to the same value, whichever the person chooses, it's still free. If they choose the money and buy a car with it, it's still a free car to them.

Well, obviously the money comes from taxes and I'm aware they're slightly higher in Scotland (but also pay for a lot more than just these child payments - eg extra funding for the NHS (including free prescriptions), transport, higher education and social care).

But what I mean is that there is a huge amount of evidence that small additional investments in children from low income families' formative years yield big savings down the line as fewer children end up in care, committing crimes, needing additional mental health services in their teens and adulthood etc. That isn't in dispute as far as I'm aware and it's a choice not to pay these south of the border because people in England seem to think they're unfair, even if they yield benefits for everyone further down the line.

I don't agree that they haven't made significant inroads into child poverty although the huge cost of living crises has undoubtedly dampened their effect. The Poverty Alliance has said that they have had a "demonstrably positive impact at individual household and family level" (even if levels of child poverty at a national level remain unjustifiably high). Scotland's child poverty rate is a significantly lower than England's.

Some quotes from an article in the National too (yes, they support independence but the experts have been quoted elsewhere from what I can see).

"This comes as Professor Danny Dorling, of Oxford University, said that the Scottish child payment may have caused the largest fall in child poverty anywhere in Europe since the fall of the Berlin Wall."

"Bill Scott, chair of the Poverty and Inequality Commission, said that the Scottish child payment “has” and “will continue to make a significant difference”.

"Chris Birt, associate director for Scotland at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, said that the payment is “significantly reducing child poverty”.
He continued: “Some people will give you various different numbers, but it is probably [reducing child poverty by] 4% or 5% at the moment.
“It will significantly reduce child poverty – that is a really good thing.”

🙄 absolute rubbish

I’m not reading this full thread because a quick glance tells me there’s plenty of the usual cunty comments.

OP, you’re honestly wasting your breath. The people that don’t get it don’t want to listen. They prefer to get wound up by what they read in the Mail or hear in GB News, supplemented by their rage about “Brian down the road has a great big flashy car and loads of holidays but gets PIP when there’s definitely nothing wrong with him.”

They won’t change their mind and even worse, they don’t really give a shit.

They just want disabled people to stop being so dreadfully inconvenient and to stop having extra care and/or mobility needs, thank you very much. It’s a depressing race to the bottom with a huge empathy bypass.

Im not disabled but I have two disabled DC, one of whom will never live independently, the other only a slim chance. I also care for DM who has cerebral palsy. And I work (self-employed at night around my caring responsibilities) so can’t claim Carers Allowance even though my caring load is huge and limits my earnings.

People have no fucking idea. None.

Just sick of all the ignorant judgement and the lack of any interest in genuinely trying to give people a hand up.

Genuine question, does the motorbility scheme cost the taxpayer more than the pip the claimant gives up?