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.

You do know a lot of disabled people will struggle to get to work then right? A lot of people need pip to get motability to have their car adapted so they can drive to work. If they means test it, bye bye adapted cars. These people then can't get to work and then less tax payers. You obviously don't know what your talking about. You have no right to decide who and who does not get pip.

I'd say she doesn't need the money.
It's like giving all pensioners, even millionaires, winter fuel allowance. I think that should be means tested too.

Oh no those people can spend it on whatever they want. Its just the disabled op seems to hate.

The issue with it is that it pays out because of daily living issues due to degree of disability. But it does not make a broad assessment of how much financially having the disability costs. That is the problem with it. There likely will be costs. Bar private school fees I suspect less than many are paid.

I have the right to express an opinion though.

Well, the government have said they’re reassessing the criteria, but it costs as much to be disabled, rich or poor, regardless of other income.

Disability isn’t a lifestyle choice - anyone with an ounce of sense would sooner have good health. 🙄

Yes but I am right about the cars aren't I? Notice how you ignored that bit because you can't aruge it.

It is. If pensioners have too much income, it’s now repaid through their tax bill. You seem to know very little about it all.

But your definition of “need” seems to be that they should have absolutely no money for anything beyond the very very basic and have no money to spend on just stuff that everyone else buys.

PIP is not means tested means tested because it doesn’t matter how much money someone has. They have extra costs compared to someone in their exact same position without that disability. Even buying different or more expensive food to manage a condition can cost them more, taxis because they can’t drive, needing the heating on more because the cold will make them unable to function, therapy, massages to ease pain etc etc. It’s to help cover the cost of literally anything they might need to pay for than someone without that disability wouldn’t need to pay for. Those extras aren’t luxuries - it’s anything they need to ease their disability, that a non disabled person wouldn’t have the same cost.

They can still have disposable income for holidays, tattoos, nights out because those are things everyone does. And they should have money left for those things, like everyone else, because we help them with the added costs of their disability for that exact reason - so they can still have money for everything else that we all waste money on.

You are completely wrong here and don’t seem to understand that they don’t need to be on the bones of their arse with no money left for anything in order to justify getting PiP.

They are already looking at it, it’s been ongoing for almost a year.

i don’t believe you are genuinely ill. . Two people at the bus stop told me they just phone in sick when they want a duvet day. Most people are scamming their employers and just don’t want to work. This is a fact.
Hope my opinion doesn’t upset you OP.

Spot on.

Interesting point about the cars. The people I know on PIP don't need adapted cars and do spend their money on what I would class as luxuries. Yes, everyone is entitled to luxuries in life including people with disabilities. No, I don't believe tax payer money should be spent on said luxuries if those on the receiving end have adequate resources already. Hence why I believe PIP should be means tested.

Oh stop it ! Receipts 😂

I think you grasp the principle of what I am saying ...

How about that then. I only know a couple of people who claim PIP, and I know for a fact that they are severely disabled. I am not privy to what they spend their PIP on, as I do not ask, they do not tell me, and further more, I have no need whatsoever to know.

Could you imagine how much extra work that would cause dla and pip. 🤣 They can't cope with just the forms and assessments, they would be quitting their jobs in droves.

😆 It doesn't!

It has to be repaid it taxable income exceeds £35k.
if you want to start a benefit bashing thread you need to do a little more research.

Yep. I know someone who gives their PIP to another family member as they've 2 kids and only 1 parent works. It's ridiculous.

If they means tested it the bar would be set incredibly low meaning those disabled people who rely on adapted cars can't afford to buy a car and adapt it themselves some adaptions can cost 100k. Therefore less tax payers as they can't afford to work... its not rocket science.

Almost by definition you are not going to see the most disabled out and about day to day in society.

i’m disabled following an accident and I attend quite a few disability support groups / exercise groups specifically for people in wheelchairs etc.

it’s very hard for people who have had a stroke and can’t walk/are dying of blood cancer/have ms/have been in severe accidents to get out and about and you aren’t going to see them going shopping or dropping the kids off at school because they are largely at home or if they are out they’re somewhere easily wheelchair accessible.

Posters going on about it being a benefit bashing thread, are you suggesting that people don't swing the system?

Because they absolutely do and where I work they will tell you they are doing so. I don't know why they do that but they do.

That takes benefits away from people who genuinely need it. There would be more money for them if it wasn't being so stretched.

Not everyone in life is super honest.

Anyone can claim though, so being told you can claim means nothing. Submitting a claim doesn’t mean being awarded.

Receipts, vouchers, it has been done to death, and is so tedious. When people have to start providing receipts for PIP, then it should be the same for all people receiving benefits, or would it be okay just to single out people on disability benefits?🤔