PIP isn't fit for purpose

[Ljcrow]

I made this comment on another thread and thought I'd start a separate thread purely on this topic. This is all from my own personal experience rather than from reading/hearing anything, I'm only going off what I see day to day.
The people I know who claim PIP do not need it financially. One works full time and earns more than me (and I'm not at imminent risk of homelessness or starvation) and the young people I know literally tell me things like their PIP's come in so they're off to get a new tattoo, which they then do. They appear to have much more disposable income than me.
These are all people who can function in society by the way and as far as I can see, all PIP does is give them extra spending money, which I'm sure we'd all like.

I'm aware this won't be the case for everyone who recieves PIP but it is for the people I come into regular contact with. Which is why it needs reloooking at so it only goes to those who actually need the money for a specific purpose related to their disability.

We're not in a position as a society where we can afford to give people money who do not actually need it.
Things like this should be means tested, both in terms of whether people have enough income to live a decent life without additional benefits and in terms of what the money is actually going to be used for.
PIP is not fit for purpose and needs scrapping or totally changing.

So?
PIP wont be their sole income. Or are people on PIP not allowed to have or do nice things?

Not when many of the tax payers and their family who willingly help them out do without. We are not a rich country unfortunately. There is no money tree.

I get pip. I also work full time.

without it I couldn’t work. I couldn’t get the reasonable adjustments that let me work full time and I couldn’t get to work without my Motability car.

I wasn’t aware I wasn’t allowed a haircut or to get my nails done.

How do you know the botox is "light" @Catswisk ?

Then most people would be wrong. DLA and PIP are not remotely the same. For a start DLA only supports children up to the age of 16, so the assessment covers a completely different set of parameters with different reference points. PIP is for those of working age 16-66 currently, which is why children are transitioned to PIP at that age.

DLA is largely paper-based and relies heavily on written application forms and medical evidence without a routine face to face examination, whereas PIP uses a structured, points-based system that mostly requires a face-to-face, phone, or video assessment with an independent assessor. It evaluates how a condition affects specific, defined daily living and mobility activities using a strict score threshold, whereas DLA looks more broadly at general care and supervision needs, and allows the assessor a much broader degree of discretion than PIP.

I have never met anyone in real life who has expressed that view.

I’m a tax payer. Why can’t I spend my own money to get a haircut or my nails done?

My pip doesn’t even touch the sides of the additional costs I have.

So what should pip be spent on? Sackcloth and ashes?

100% agree.

Some disabilities are not diagnosed because there is no explanation for the medical conditions. That’s why charities like SWAN UK exist. Our child is one of those, four years of hell with declining health and we only got a diagnosis a few months ago due to a research full gene panel that found something which has only been discovered two years ago and has less than a handful cases worldwide.

Just because people have no diagnosis doesn’t mean they cannot be disabled, you still need to provide proof of symptoms and how it affects daily life.

It's quite easy to know someone is not too anxious to go out if they actually do go out. Not sure what evidence people need to provide either. It's not the same as being physically unable to walk.

Okay you are right. If someone is not eligible for a free assistance dog from a charity, but decide themselves they need one, they have to buy and train their own dog.
Emotional support animals are legally in the UK, not assistance dogs

I don't think that I am the one coming across as 'ignorant', on this thread.

Well, here’s the thing. I’ve got physical disabilities, long proven, and nothing to argue about.

Professionals have decided I need DLA (a lot of adult DLA awards in London have never transferred to PIP).

I ask for nothing extra - I pay for any help I need, I pay my full rent, and I pay tax.

But, here’s the killer. I pay for a manicure and polish once a month, and I keep my hair coloured and cut.

Shoot me now. 🙄

PIP is not means tested, no, but I agree with the OP that it should be. Why should people who are wealthy and on a high income get any benefits?

That's a fucking long winded way to say ones for under 16, ones for over, and the under 16 one's on paper 😂😂😂😂

Having been through both processes, the differences are immaterial.

Good for you💐

You’re disabled. And on MN, regardless of whether you’re working or not (actually scrub that - if you’re working why do you need PIP) you shouldn’t have anything in your life that could remotely be regarded as a luxury. You should turn off the heating and the lights immediately, cover yourself with sack cloth and wait quietly and without fuss in the corner for death, so as not to be a ‘burden on the taxpayer’. Oh, and the fact that you’re working and paying tax yourself means nothing - if you’re not a net contributor then you’re still scrounging.🤣

I have a support dog. He’s trained by an accredited trainer from ADUK and he had to sit a test.

i had to pay for him. He’s my dog. He wasn’t provided by an organisation.

do people really think that means I don’t need him?

Why should someone who is disabled not get PIP just because their partner earns a lot?
PIP is awarded to individuals, not the household.

How dare you take pride in your appearance!

I didn't know that about DLA awards in London.

Okay. Well I shall be bowing out now, it’s like banging your head against a brick wall. If you’ve read any of my posts you’ll see I don’t think benefits should be scrapped, I claim DLA for my child, my mentally disabled sister gets pip and esa herself. I just want people to understand not all claims are genuinely struggling with what they claim they are. Some people want the extra cash, some want a new car.

An emotional support dog is legally not an assistance dog.

You need medical evidence to back up those claims. You don't just fill out the forms and they go on your word.

He’s not an emotional support dog. I didn’t say he was.

If it is means tested that would change as all means tested be edits are based on a households income.