Do people really think PIP claimants are fraudsters?!

[Greedybilly]

As someone with a chronic illness in the middle of claiming PIP I think it's important to point out it's very stressful to go through the process and actually get the benefit.
To those who were inferring it's an easy blag - I would say yes there will always be a few scammers who claim fraudulently ( though god knows how tbh?) the majority have to struggle for years/go through appeals/give up.
Just saying this for balance as I feel MN is turning slghtly into the Daily Fail.

If you get a certain number of points under the ' moving around' descriptor of PIP then many councils will automatically give you a Blue badge. maybe your ds receives high rate mobility under the other mobility descriptor ( the one where people claim to be too anxious etc to do a journey/ have panic attacks etc, cannot follow an unfamiliar route ). .
I actually think it's you spouting the BS.

Yup. People must live in a very different reality to the rest of us.

Have you read the posts? Or do you just respond to everything with an wierd angry tone?

Believe it or not, lots of people live in lots of different realities. Surely it not that hard to believe that one persons experience is different to another.

If I lived with my boyfriend, why should his income and savings be taken into account when seeing if I can have PIP? I am the one that is disabled. It is not like UC where it is used for bills and food etc and benefits both of us.
By means testing PIP, disabled people would be running down their own savings quicker than someone who is not if they are above the threshold. Then they would be entitled to PIP. Then probably the spending scrutinised to make sure they were not depriving themselves of capital.
This already happens in other means tested benefits. So disabled people would be hit twice.

I responded to your other shitty post as well yes.

Still dont understand what your meaning is.

Sure, there seems to be quite a lot of active psychosis on this thread 😁

I'm not going to engage with you any further. There is no point trying to discuss with some using derogatory terms to other peoples views on life.

It’s hilarious the amount of tone policing and accusations of ‘aggression’ on this thread from posters who have not been able to provide any meaningful rebuttals. Desperate times I guess!

Honestly I think my toddler has better debating skills 😆

You've so far not engaged at all.

Your comment comparing being disabled to being ugly was shitty.

I know right. Lolz at 'derogatory terms' 🤣

You have proven my point perfectly. Insults and being disrespectful will not help your cause. We live in a democracy and it matters what the majority believe even if you think they are 'knuckle draggers'. The poll associated with this thread and other similar polls speak volumes. You would be wise to listen and try to comprehend what is actually being said rather than rushing to misrepresent and use hyperbole.

I didn't necessarily advocate the use of vouchers but simply explained why this would have some support from the population. I also explained how linking spend to the assessed need could be done. There was some disagreement about whether disabled people expensing their disability related costs was dehumanising, with some suggesting the concept of expensing things was intrinsically dehumanising. I pointed out that many employees and businesses did this as a matter of course to get their own money back. The concept in itself therefore isn't necessarily dehumanising but obviously it could be applied in a dehumanising way and we would want to avoid that. If you have ever dealt with fostered children then you would understand that the expenses model is already used by the state.

“We don't compensate people born with low intelligence.”

What does this mean?! Do you know what a learning disability is?

@Marshmallow4545 I was involved in the consultation and re-design of the Scottish ADP benefit, which used to be PIP. One of the main reasons for the overhaul was due to the amount of harm caused to claimants by that system. I have actual experience of what I am talking about, I’m not just parroting benefit bashing rhetoric from the Daily Fail.

Feel free to @ me when you actually have experience to back up your claims and suggestions.

I don’t need to argue with the likes of you and I have no case no prove. I have already taken part in meaningful systemic change, which is hopefully making the lives of disabled claimants a bit easier. Your musings and pontifications have no real world implications, but by all means continue with the silly suggestions and tiresome ignorance if it makes you feel important.

Sorry I have to come back on this so that those with better comprehension don't just take your quote. I did not say disability equals ugly. I said that being beautiful on average leads to better earnings than being ugly, just like being more intelligent leads to better earnings.

i must admit to being baffled at needing to pay attention to the opinions of a whole 47% of 491 voters (roughly 230 i believe) who don't think the OP is being unreasonable, when 260 other people think they are..

Not exactly a controlled test on public opinion.

I'm not the one trying to feel self important. You may have noticed England has absolutely no intention of adopting the more expensive ADP model. The direction of change is in the other direction and ultimately it will become unaffordable for Scotland too.
Let's agree to disagree and see in five years time what has actually happened shall we?

I often feel like a fraud as I’ve got an invisible disability. However, when I doubt myself I just tell myself that I was 100% honest in my interview and the lady still approved me. Basically, when she asked me a question, I would say ‘on a good day I can do this’, ‘on a bad day I can do this’. It was hard though.

And that people dont get help for them, so why should they for being disabled? Was that the jist?

That’s funny because I am currently working with the DWP to make similar changes. But of course we don’t know what the future holds politically.

Essentially I think there will always be issues applying a business model to matters such as disability and mental health.

So why should a wealthy person with a disability get help, not why should any person with a disability get help. Many people with a disability in one area of life have exceptional ability in another that leads to high earning potential. I would means test like we do for many other things to enable support to be focused on those who couldn't otherwise easily afford to cover the costs themselves.

Same, there is no need to be anything but honest with them

I actually wasn't expecting to get it, because i've spent so many years just... getting on with it, but having to hash out, in detail what my normal day is like, what my 'bad day' is like, and how the one is dwindling while the occurrence of the other rises, was thought provoking.

When i got my award, and i was genuinely shocked, my friends had to both remind me i got it because i AM that disabled now, for all i do my best to still live my life.

“Many people with a disability in one area of life have exceptional ability in another than leads to high earning potential.”

What does this mean?!

Ok and like I asked another poster. What is 'wealthy'? What would your cut off be for help?

Shroedinger’s disability claimant. Simultaneously never worked a day in their life(so don’t deserve PIP), while being loaded from their jobs (so they don’t need PIP).