Benefit cuts will cost the economy.

[MistressoftheDarkSide]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/apr/29/labours-benefit-cuts-will-cost-uk-economy-billions-charity-says

Interesting article which repeats what some of us have been saying about the likely consequences of the proposed measures, including increased pressure on services.

You were the one who used that word, you confidently stated that CAB are providing that advice, exaggerating is a form of dishonesty, if you HAVE to exaggerate to be entitled then that means you would not be entitled if you told the truth- and therefore you are not actually entitled.

Perhaps if people weren’t “exaggerating” to claim PIP then the current reform would not be needed because only the people who do actually fit the criteria if answering honestly would be claiming and so there would be no concern whatsoever over the ever growing bill.

Exaggerate = representing something to be better or worse than it is. Straight from the OED.

I think the standard advice CAB used to give (maybe still do) is to make sure you describe your worst day, and not only your good days. I’m not sure we can really characterise that as encouraging claimants to exaggerate.

No, presumably the advice would be per the guidance that PIP should be about how you are affected the majority of the time, not your best day, not your worst day, your typical day- most days.

If you are filling in the forms answering as if it is your worst day then that IS exaggerating, it is dishonest, and you are doing that because if you filled it in accurately for your average day you would not be eligible. So it is funny how we’ve gone from “oh no PIP has a 0% fraud rate” to “CAB are advising people to fraudulently claim by exaggerating symptoms”. Interestingly even a quick bit of online search expressly confirms that answering as if it is your worst day or “exaggerating” is indeed fraudulent.

Exactly this. We were told to use our worst days as an example.

(In our case, they’re all ‘worst days’, so it didn’t make any difference)

But I’m just a little person on mumsnet why are you running with one word I used like it’s gospel and I’m god ? I’ve never applied for pip but like I said I do know the hardships some people go through to have their very serious medical conditions taken seriously by ‘none medical’ expert assessors (even with pages of evidence).

Most initially get refused so approach CAB and other helpful services who can advise to get the PIP they fully deserve.

Do you not watch the news or other outlets or listen to people’s experiences, they can’t all be lying what about the charities? on how brutal it is for fully deserving people to get justice.

PIP needed reformed for the better instead it’s been made more brutal.

You clearly don't understand how disability works. You could watch me use the kettle once and deduce from that I have no issues using the kettle. In reality, every time I use the kettle, I'm at risk of throwing boiling water over myself.

I need to make that risk clear, because saying I have absolutely no issues with using the kettle would be inaccurate. I can use a kettle. I can also give myself horrible burns using a kettle. So which is true? I can use a kettle or I can't?

Me making one cup of tea without incident does not mean I'm not impacted by my disability. I need to make that very clear otherwise it'll be assumed I can use a kettle all the time just as an able bodied person could. I can't. It's dangerous.

But the assessors still twist it all round and play with your words so you might express you have a tiny amount of capability to do something minuscule inside your house, next thing they knock a point off your overall result.

They are very crafty.

Filling in the forms is one thing it’s when you’re sitting in-front of a panel your words can be misconstrued as they ask crafty questions then twist them.

I know from my mother and sister’s experiences and have even attended tribunals in which the outcome went in their favour.

The issue is, if the assessors weren’t hell bent on trying to prove the person in-front of them is a liar (even with evidence) also twisting words then there would be no need for extra tribunals and the likes, which also costs the taxpayer.

I think we know by now considering the expensive educations most politicians have had, they aren’t blessed with common sense as we’ll see in future when all the changes backfire and crime rates go up.

Because you used the word - if you don’t want to be pulled up think about what you’re saying before you post. In any case a poster has said that they work for the CAB and don’t exaggerate and wouldn’t exaggerate so it all seems unlikely anyway.

Someone I know (a bright student doing an integrated masters in mathematics at a top university) gets PIP due to autism.

They used their PIP money for a holiday to America. As in they got a lump sum payment and just used that to go on holiday.

Kinda showed that without the PIP they were managing and surviving.

And? It just has to be reasonable for you to need the support. You don't need to prove that you have extra costs or what the moneys going to be spent on

PIP isn’t means tested. It’s irrelevant what you spend the money on.

This is very sad! Where is your family? Do you have no family or friends who care enough to help?! Absolutely appalling!

This person knows they'll most likely not be getting PIP again. I'll glad the taxpayer will be saved some money (in this specific instance alone)

If they got a lump sum, then that will be back pay from the period between applying and actually being awarded.

The fact they survived that interim period does not mean they are not in need of the money! If they've gone without equipment/services they required for say a year or two they can't go back in time and pay for them with the lump sum!

And if they lose their PIP, you, the taxpayer will not see that saving personally. You won't get a tax reduction, just some other area of tax spending will go up.

I had a big lump sum in back pay from my change of circumstances review - it took 19 months! In that time I cut back on our food and fuel use, and used that money to pay for services and stuff. When I got that back pay we got to go back to having three meals a day not two, and eating fresh food, because the weekly income had gone up and it went into my savings for the next big purchases. I was lucky not to go into debt, if I had, the backpay would have repaid it, but should we REALLY be saying 'if you didn't get into debt, you don't get any back pay'?

Oh, thanks for such a concerned message. That's kind of you.

I have a small amount of family but they are either far away or they have the same condition because it's genetic.

I do have a lot of friends and they do help where they can. I'm not especially good at asking for help. I don't like to be a burden. But they've come over before and tidied up the whole place for me or filled the fridge with ready meals. But there's no one who could care for me all the time.

Despite all this, I do try my best to be stoic and actually have just have a laugh where I can. Moping around won't cure me! :)

Oh ok so one ex employee ( she was only speaking for herself btw) from cab in the whole of the uk has spoken. Must be gospel then.

OK so what you say about CAB staff exaggerating - is that gospel also? I would really like to know what your sources are.

Like I said the word exaggerate was a poorly chosen word but very easily done by anyone.

The previous poster who gives an example about being able to use a kettle even though it could be detrimental to her safety puts it perfectly.

Advisors will give such examples and warn you that your words could be twisted ( a bit like on here) as assessors will just hear you can lift a kettle but not be bothered about the implications that act could have on you.

Its about giving or deducting points to protect the social fund, they bank on people not having the mental strength or will to appeal the decisions.

That is a good attitude. I hope you continue to get help from those who know you in real life. Sad to hear about someone struggling so much on their own. It is a shame that the cost of labour is so high in this country that you cannot hire anyone to care for you on a daily basis. Take care!

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/cover-up-allows-dwp-and-other-public-bodies-to-avoid-detailed-probe-into-disabled-womans-death/

I think we can predict more cases like this in the future. So benefit cuts won't just cost the economy, they'll cost lives.

What extra support does one need if they’re doing a masters and travelling the world! For gods sake, we weren’t born yesterday. Stop trying to make out disability is this intangible thing which is justified if the individual says it is, clearly this person is taking the piss.

A neighbour got diagnosed with a serious illness and became eligible for PIP etc. They already had two decent cars, but first thing they did was get a "fun" car under Motability. Yes, it was their "entitlement", but they certainly didn't need another car, and it was a small sporty car so didn't have any disability aids included - they both continued using their other two cars for normal journeys. It's that kind of waste that needs tackling - as I say, yes, they were "entitled" but they didn't actually "need" the money. I'd rather the money be spent on those who needed it.