To ask you all the take a minute to look at the proposed Green Paper on work & welfare, particularly the cuts to PIP.

[MarvellousMonsters]

The Government has published a green paper which amongst other things proposes to change the PIP eligibility, which will ‘save £5b’ by removing financial
support from those who don’t score 4 points in a single criteria in the daily living component of PIP.

green paper in full

It’s estimated that it can cost up to £1000 a month in extra living expenses as a disabled person, and the daily living allowance of PIP is designed to help towards these costs. The lowest rate is £72.65 a week, (£290.60 a month) and this is a literal life line to those who have a limited capability for work, are ‘not disabled enough’ to qualify for full support, but do need help. It allows people to pay for things like cleaners and domestic help, to buy ready prepped veg etc to allow them to eat proper healthy food, to heat their home if they have poor body temp control, and so on. The proposed changes will push these people into acute poverty, and also reduce their quality of life, not just financially, but because being in receipt of PIP makes people eligible for other types of practical support.

You may feel this isn’t something that affects you, but disability can happen to anyone, as those previous fit healthy people who are now incapacitated by Long Covid can confirm. You could be in a car accident, or become sick, it could literally happen to anyone, so this truly does concern everyone, even if you are currently able-bodied and well.

Please, if you do nothing else, please fill in the consultation form and lobby the DWP not to introduce the ‘4 point rule’. If you only do that you’ll help thousands of people who are currently at risk of losing vital support.

consultation form

TLDR: please tell Liz Kendall not to remove vital welfare support from disabled people.

It should be means tested and only allowances for the more serious disabilities allowed. It has got totally out of hand going by posts I've seen on here.

🥱

Just watching the BBC news now. They are really pushing through assisted dying. Apparently the first assisted death will be 2029 or 2030 at the latest. Interesting timing.

It certainly isn't easy. I've been doing PIP applications for clients since PIP was first introduced. Around half my applications are declined.

I appeal almost all of them (sometimes the client can't face the prospect of going before a tribunal). I've yet to lose an appeal.

That indicates to me that around 50% of applications are wrongly refused.

Yes the system is the very definition of insanity. Does anyone look at why so many of the first assessments are then overturned on appeal? It’s like they can’t get them “right” first time. This sort of error rate should not be allowed. It’s all grossly inefficient, time consuming and costly.

The system is set up for people to be rejected and to not bother appealing, I. Have a life long medical condition that will never change but I've lost count how many times I've been through appeal processes it's barbaric.

Thank you. Yeah, in that case I'm praying I'll be ok. But they could just say well the amount of money you get is still less? As we've changed the goalposts or just decided we think disabled people don't deserve decent living standards. It's not like we have choice other than take what we're given.
They need to tax the rich not penalise the impoverished and sick.

And this is what the Government should be concerning themselves with, not trying to do disabled people out of help. The public should be questioning this as well, but I understand that they perhaps will be unaware of the colossal waste going on, and only following the narrative that they are constantly being fed by the media.

Can't believe a labour gov is doing this. Shocking.

So much for making the ultra rich pay..there are companies that pay less tax than the cleaners they employ.

But mental health issues, for example, can cover a huge range of conditions - I have anxiety, diagnosed, I take medication for it, I don't need and I'm not entitled to any benefits for it. On the other hand you have people with severe mental health conditions, where the medication side effects alone leave them unable to work, and where they're in and out of hospital, and cannot function well enough to hold down a job.

Back pain - if your pain is so severe you can't get out of bed unaided, or wash, dress or prepare food, how can you work? Diagnosis can be the same, the severity could vary hugely.

As for the extra benefits, we get DLA for DS. We're still £6,000 a year worse off than if DH & I both worked full time minimum wage jobs and, at this rate, DH is going to have pretty much no private/workplace pension income come retirement.

It's been suggested that when people are denied and win at tribunal, the company doing the assessment are fined.

I don't think I've ever come across a case where "I got 6 points. I went to tribunal and got 8 points". But have seen a lot of "I scored 0 points. I went to tribunal and got enhanced on both". I think we need to question why the latter happens.

I went from low rate mobility to high rate on both at Mr and nothing changed except I asked for it to be recorded and questioned every lie they told

ADP (Scottish version of PIP - same amounts and criteria/system) and ESA constitute my entire income of £10,000 a year and I'd stand to lose it all with these rules if I were in England, despite not being well enough to work. As I'm in Scotland, I would hopefully cling on to my ADP but I'd still lose my ESA which is the majority. I'm not an unusual case. I'm not entitled to anything more because my partner earns slightly more than minimum wage most of the time (although he's self employed so sometimes doesn't make anything for weeks) and because I have some savings which I'm desperate to hold on to in case I need surgery abroad for one of my conditions which isn't recognised by the NHS (I've needed surgery abroad in the past and it stopped me becoming far more disabled). I'm lucky to have family that top me up and help with my costs because I couldn't afford to live on this amount which is less than 50% of minimum wage even after tax has been deducted from what I understand (not that I could ever dream of making minimum wage). Don't believe what you read in the press. It was a long time ago that most disabled people were given enough to live on comfortably and those that still get this are mostly single and therefore eligible for universal credit. `

When people only miss out by a couple of points, the decisions are often overturned at the mandatory reconsideration stage, so not many like that reach a tribunal. But I've had clients get zero points for daily living, and be awarded the enhanced rate at tribunal.

It's really distressing for clients (I always make sure I have plenty of tissues!) and a huge waste of time and money.

My team (5 of us, but was 6) has been doing this work for 7 years and in all that time, we've lost one PIP appeal. At a guesstimate, we've probably done around 200.

I completely agree that if we could control it completely no one should be in poverty. But I think the broader point is that there are working people (and no, I’m not saying disability is anyone’s fault - of course it isn’t) who have had a dramatic decline in their standard of living, some to the extent that they have fallen into poverty. They might well feel very disappointed and unhappy that they are not getting help/more help when other groups are not sharing in that? We are -quite rightly - expected to “share” with others through taxation. But why shouldn’t those on the “benefit” side of sharing not be expected to share in the downturn/inflation or whatever it is that is causing the general drop in living standards?

The only real answer to that is that there should be a “floor” below which we guarantee no one falls, so we don’t reduce someone below that level. But that is what benefits aim to do. So the questions then become, is the floor too low, who should we expect to contribute to that themselves and to what degree (e.g. how “hard” should it be to get disability benefits) and how much should others be expected to pay and in what shares (who pays tax and how much). Thinking about it like this - rather than being “chilled”, disgusted or whatever else - is probably a more constructive way to formulate a position on it all.

I'm sure some of them are prepared to move. They just can't afford to move area whilst struggling to live on £400 a month!

What would you propose?

It's all very well but who is supposed to be paying for all these benefits . It's ordinary tax payers like me who are working full time and seeing their standard of living fall.
Why should I be funding people who can and should be working or looking after their family members . This country is broke and so am I

''@yellowspanner · Today 21:34

It's all very well but who is supposed to be paying for all these benefits . It's ordinary tax payers like me who are working full time and seeing their standard of living fall. Why should I be funding people who can and should be working or looking after their family members . This country is broke and so am ''

And again: PIP is NOT an out of work benefit.

I work, I am a tax payer and I receive PIP.

But most people claiming it don't work.
The numbers claiming it are shocking. I am on a PIP facebook group, it's really alarming the numbers of young people claiming. There are going to be no workers left to pay for it all. It's completely unsustainable. I don't think people realize the mess we are in.

I think the PP’s point was that she has had a drop in living standards so why shouldn’t others?

I suspect in reality everyone has, but I do - in part - take your point.

People before the current welfare state existed died much younger on average than they do now (yes, medical advances play a significant part in that, but not the only part).

People in developing countries that don't have the resources to support people in need have much lower life expectancies than people in the UK and similar countries.

Right, so what? Things have improved for a lot of people, thanks in no small part to modern medicine etc, We all know this!

The poster to whom I was responding implied that this improvement was a privilege that people in developed countries nowadays are mistaken to expect.;: that we 'can't imagine a world where people are worse off and needs aren't met like they have been in the latter half of the 20th century and the early 2000s'; and that the majority world 'don't have a large state and welfare state that they assume must provide them with a certain quality of life' and that we should not be expecting to continue to have this privilege. I was pointing out that this would mean accepting that far fewer people would SURVIVE.

In fact, one of the worst things that our so-called Labour government is doing is reducing international development spending and therefore reducing the survival chances of people in poorer countries; but that is perhaps for another thread. In any case, I don't consider enabling ill, disabled or poor people to survive as something to be regarded as a luxury,

Many of us with disabilities have seen our standards of living fall

Have you seen the report by Scope about the average disability costs being £1000 per month? The maximum amount of pip you can get is £749 per month

It's funny how people complain about the amount of people claiming but don't want to address NHS waiting lists or the way people are assessed. It's also a waste of time and money reassessing people like me who aren't going to wake up cured