One in six PIP claimants have no extra costs linked to their disability

[Allseeingallknowing]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/money/40693771/pip-claimants-disability-benefit/
So, can money be saved here?

This!

I wouldn’t worry about the admin, it would be easy to implement such a system and any costs in doing so might well offset monies lost to fraudulent claims.

Why not? It’d be easy for gov to directly pay for taxis, for example. Analagous to for example how I have a corporate profile on uber that directly charges any uber rides back to my company. Has a cap etc applied and from a taxi driver perspective there’s no difference to them ie they don’t get lower fares.

I genuinely think vouchers could work in claimants favour if they thought about it rather than emotionally discounting them

And how will they work out what cap to apply? Or will disabled people only be allowed out so many times a week within a certain distance? What's to stop this being abused by the wrong people using it? or being abused by making the vulnerable disabled person go with them so they can get free transport?

Can't they just simply disagree with you? I think it is in poor taste to discount the opinions of actual disabled people/their families as 'emotional'.

No, vouchers wouldn’t work for us. At all. That isn’t me being ‘emotional’. I have thought about it.

I asked this earlier in the thread but the poster I replied to didn’t answer so I will post it again.

What happens when someone wants to give some petrol money to a neighbour or family member to take them somewhere instead of getting a taxi? Or when the only available taxi provider won’t take the vouchers or will only take them at certain times or charge an admin fee?

What about when they need to forgo the taxi into town (or you can insert any other destination) one week because they have an unexpected disability related expense but can’t afford that because all they have left is a taxi voucher?

What happens is if a taxi isn’t suitable?

In some areas, taxi ‘vouchers’ already exist, look at the subsidised taxicards in some areas, but it isn’t instead of PIP and it isn’t a system without problems.

Well said.

They are non-issues already faced by the current cash handout system.

eg they have had to work out a cap of how much money to hand out. Note: it presumably wouldn’t be that different to base the cap on specific need which is no different to how individuals work out their annual budgets (eg how often do I need to travel to work / medical appointments etc)

Eg re. Abuse, no different to having to stop the “wrong people” getting the handouts or coercing the “vulnerable people” to give them their cash (deliberately using your phraseology to illustrate the point).

Of course they’re welcome to disagree. That’s the basis of debate and improving collective ideas and quality of thought after all.

Re. emotional, you only have to look up thread to find an example of a lady threatening life ending actions should they award vouchers. Would seem to be an emotional reaction in my books.

They’d be more than welcome to give petrol money to a friend or family member, no-one would stop them. Why would they be prevented from doing so?

Given how widespread the vouchers would be, in suspect there’d be no issue getting taxi providers that use them (particularly if uber). Why would an admin charge be an issue? The claimant would pay in vouchers (eg 1 x trip to doc for Y appointment), the actual cost to them would be irrelevant (and I suspect taxi providers engaging in the what I imagine would be good business scheme for them wouldn’t be allowed to charge admin fees).

How could they forgo the taxi trip if it’s for a disability related issue (medical appt/getting to work as can’t drive etc)? If it can be foregone it would seem unnecessary.

also, wouldn’t their other unexpected disability cost be covered by the other relevant voucher and / or couldn’t they just pay for it normally? No one is saying they’re banned from having cash, just that elements of the benefit maybe better provided by way of direct access to a service/product via voucher (/system e.g. taxi account) rather than targeted cash.

conceptually the scheme already works in various places. Consider free school meals for example. The kids get them without the parents having to be given cash to give to the kids to pay for them (which has clamped down on the obvious issues).

i accept there’ll be flaws or limitations however they wouldn’t presumably be insurmountable with a determined mindset and some creativity.

This is just a debate to you but for some people, this is actually their lives. Of course it's emotional but does it mean their opinions are any less valid?

I never said their opinion was any less valid. Presumably my opinion as a tax payer is valid also? Or am I not entitled to an opinion over how much and how tax receipts are collected and spent? Ie it’s not just a “debate” to be in the sense you’ve framed it. Nor should it be to anyone - the govt is legally obliged for example to get value for money fit tax payer money

I’ve explained my thinking in another post on this thread. Basically, I think if families who were in a position to help did so then there would not be the need for so much state support. Too many people think it is the state’s role to intervene whenever something goes wrong in life. It is not.

It also illustrates the point vouchers will still be open to abuse and fraud.

Yet not too long ago you seemed adamant that the government should spend an absolute fortune on specialist wraparound care for disabled children.

I also have doubts that a voucher system would actually save money but also that any potential flaws would be worth it.

They’d be more than welcome to give petrol money to a friend or family member, no-one would stop them. Why would they be prevented from doing so?

How would they be able to give money to a friend or family member if the part of the PIP award they would use to fund that is given in taxi vouchers instead?

Given how widespread the vouchers would be, in suspect there’d be no issue getting taxi providers that use them (particularly if uber). Why would an admin charge be an issue? The claimant would pay in vouchers (eg 1 x trip to doc for Y appointment), the actual cost to them would be irrelevant (and I suspect taxi providers engaging in the what I imagine would be good business scheme for them wouldn’t be allowed to charge admin fees).

Lots of voucher systems charge an admin fee or a higher rate when using a voucher. Similarly, lots of services charge a higher rate when the state pays directly for a service for a disabled person.

I do not have your faith that some taxi providers won’t accept vouchers for disabled people.

How could they forgo the taxi trip if it’s for a disability related issue (medical appt/getting to work as can’t drive etc)? If it can be foregone it would seem unnecessary.

Wow, you really haven’t got a clue. Plenty of disabled people have to cancel (or just not turn up to) appointments because they can’t afford to get there. It doesn’t make it unnecessary. There is research by condition specific charities about this. Plus, why are disabled people only limited to essential travel? Non-disabled people aren’t.

also, wouldn’t their other unexpected disability cost be covered by the other relevant voucher and / or couldn’t they just pay for it normally?

No, many can’t just pay out of other vouchers/money. As has been said, repeatedly, for many PIP doesn’t cover the full cost of disability related expenses. Some people wouldn’t have money/vouchers left to pay for it.

conceptually the scheme already works in various places. Consider free school meals for example. The kids get them without the parents having to be given cash to give to the kids to pay for them (which has clamped down on the obvious issues).

Except some disabled families are receiving money directly instead of FSM because the state recognises providing meals directly isn’t suitable for all. I have even mentioned this in this thread to a pp and directed her to Contact’s letters.

i accept there’ll be flaws or limitations however they wouldn’t presumably be insurmountable with a determined mindset and some creativity.

You presume wrong.

I agree with the sentiment of this more broadly, not just in relation to this specific topic. For me there’s a distinct lack of self responsibility coupled with learned helplessness that mean many people expect the state to pick up the pieces.

eg:
Things become more expensive (cost of living “crisis”) = cries for govt (= other tax payer money) handouts
Redundancy = demands for government to “create jobs” (not withstanding the fact gov doesn’t)
Illness = demands for gov sick pay / disability supports etc (rather than provisioning money and / or family support in advance)
Have more kids than can afford = more demands for more gov handouts to pay for the kids
Need support in old age = expect state provided social care rather than expecting to look after / be looked after by family (or in the absence of family, pay for it yourself)

I did as I see that a good investment for the country given the opportunities it would provide for the children and that it would enable the parents to work.

That’s good value for money (don’t make the mistake of equating value for money = spending less or on the cheap. Very different).

They might be but less so than cash.

From what's been in the news, it sounds like vouchers have already been discussed and largely ruled out, have they not? They would just increase admin costs so that there would be even less for the people who need it and also be a massive headache. I regularly buy various disability related items from foreign companies, for example, because they're better quality and cheaper than the British alternatives in some cases and in others there are no British options that I'm aware of - the product is unique. There's no way we can create a system whereby foreign companies are made to accept these British vouchers so it just limits the choices of disabled people and forces them either to go without things that help them entirely or to have to buy more expensive, inferior British goods. And have less available to spend on other things. The amounts most people get already don't come anywhere near to meeting the actual costs.

Regarding the point of the thread - that there are people who seemingly don't have extra disability related costs, you have to remember that some of them don't have any other income though so they need this money for food and other basic living expenses. It's not supposed to be for that because there's supposed to be other provision but so many people aren't eligible that it ends up being needed for these things. I don't think it would hurt though to ask people to submit an example of typical costs during the application process and take that into consideration. It is odd that it isn't considered at all.

Why do you think the government haven't thought to do it already and instead accept that parents of disabled children aren't required to work?

Money to family / friend: use non PIP money ie their own money of their choosing to not use the provided for means of transport.

Taxi provides not accepting vouchers: ok I guess we can disagree on that one. Don’t forget it didn’t necessity need to be specific hard copy or electronic vouchers. See my example re my corporate uber account. The Uber driver gets the same money ordinarily get in the same way they’d normally get it, it’s just that it’s paid for direct by my company ie I’m disconnected from the financial transaction.

Re. travel: well it sounds like the “voucher” / services system would work much better in this case as they wouldn’t have to forego the trip given they’d have access to the taxi.

of course they’re allowed unnecessary trips in the same way as everyone else. They just pay for them in the same way as everyone else. But given the question in hand is in relation to additional costs associated with their disability, then it would seem only sensible to bound those to necessary trips associated with having the disability. Presumably youre not saying having a disability should entitle someone to endless free trips independent of the purpose of the trip?

Ill give you an example of why I don’t think they’ve not thought of it already…:

Andy Burnham. Has spent his entire adult (possibly longer) life wanting to be PM. Has had all that time to think of the policies he’d implement to make the country a better place.

Gets into power. What’s he do? £2 bus fares and reduces VAT on kids activities.

Wow. All that time and that’s what he’s come up with?

Money to family / friend: use non PIP money ie their own money of their choosing to not use the provided for means of transport

Where it is a disability related expense, why shouldn’t they be able to use PIP? What if they don’t have any other money other than benefits?

Don’t forget it didn’t necessity need to be specific hard copy or electronic vouchers.

I’m not forgetting anything. I just disagree with you. Completely.

Re. travel: well it sounds like the “voucher” / services system would work much better in this case as they wouldn’t have to forego the trip given they’d have access to the taxi.

No, it wouldn’t.

of course they’re allowed unnecessary trips in the same way as everyone else. They just pay for them in the same way as everyone else.

For some disabled people, the only money they receive are benefits.

given the question in hand is in relation to additional costs associated with their disability, then it would seem only sensible to bound those to necessary trips associated with having the disability. Presumably youre not saying having a disability should entitle someone to endless free trips independent of the purpose of the trip?

No, it isn’t sensible. There can be disability related costs related to a trip without the trip itself being a necessary trip and a disability related expense. The destination may not be a disability related trip but the travel there may be. For example, someone may be visiting family in a trip that isn’t about their disability, but it is a mile away. While many people would walk it and some would get the bus, some will need a taxi for disability related reasons. Unless you are suggesting disabled people should only be able to go out if leaving the house is necessary for their disability? I did not say anyone should be given endless amounts. The current PIP amounts aren’t endless.

How much do you think it would cost to make and roll out a whole new system where everywhere and everyone accepts these vouchers? How long will it take for the country to recoup that in 'savings' from no longer paying pip in cash?

if they give you the low/high mobility element in a voucher instead of cash how will friends and family 'trade in' a voucher if you paid them for petrol?

Currently you're assessed and put in a bracket for how much pip you can have. Will that stay the same?

How will they assess and decide how much of your daily living component should be paid in a voucher for water/gas/electric/food/therapy/equipment/care? How much extra will this cost in admin time?

What happens when needs fluctuate and change and you need extra gas for heating for a few months but you've already used up all your gas voucher. You have a food voucher left over which you don't need that month because you've been unwell so have eaten less than normal, but that won't help with your extra gas requirement.

what happens when your carer has a break and you need someone just for a day or two but you have no voucher to use towards paying for care because you don't usually need to pay for it so one hasn't been issued?

It's almost like it saves them money or something.....