Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Incapacity benefits paid to 2.5 million working age people.
    Disability benefits paid to 2.1 million working age people.
    Combine those figures and Incapacity and/Disability benefits paid to 3.5 million working age people.
    When you consider that approximately 18% of working age adults in the UK are disabled, which amounts to over 11million disabled working age adults in the UK, and less than half the working age disabled population are employed - this means that almost half of the disabled working age population who can't work, aren't receiving disability benefits. These figures also do not include those with mental health issues such as anxiety and depression, and may also not include the chronically ill.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by It's****ingWOODY)
    When you consider that approximately 18% of working age adults in the UK are disabled, which amounts to over 11million disabled working age adults in the UK, and less than half the working age disabled population are employed - this means that almost half of the disabled working age population aren't receiving disability benefits. These figures also do not include those with mental health issues such as anxiety and depression, and may also not include the chronically ill.
    43% of the British population do not know anyone who is disabled.

    Either there is a damn great ghetto where they keep all the disabled or there is a very large mismatch between the opinions of the self-declared disabled and those around them as to whether they are in fact disabled.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Who wrote the letter? There would be very few DWP clerks, and fewer tribunals, who would go against a letter written by the claimant's consultant which states in terms:

    By reason of [disease X or disablement Y] there would be a substantial risk, namely [ABC], to the [mental or physical] health of [claimant/named other person] if [claimant] was found not to have limited capability for work.

    That is the test for Regulation 29, and if you have that you should win. If you don't have that, then what you have isn't worth the paper it is written on.
    my ex partners mum was medically retired from work be occupational health anc had consultants letters stating she was not fit for work aswell as the occupational health report. she had to jump through lots of hoops to get PIP even having to go to an assessment when really she shouldnt have had to as consultants (plural) and occupational health had said she wasnt aloud to work again and should actually bebon bed rest or in a wheelchair...
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    43% of the British population do not know anyone who is disabled.

    Either there is a damn great ghetto where they keep all the disabled or there is a very large mismatch between the opinions of the self-declared disabled and those around them as to whether they are in fact disabled.
    A large chunk of the population are ignorant to disability and to them, "disabled" means "in a wheelchair". This figure means practically nothing.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I don't really understand why some of the general public think it's easy to get disability benefits - it's not. Fraud is at less than 1% for disability benefits. Poor assessments leading to incorrect decisions, sanctions and prematurely closed claims hurt the most vulnerable in society, like this lady. Now her kids will grow up without their mum and her friends and family will have to cope with their loss. It's just sad and an avoidable loss of life.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PandaWho)
    my ex partners mum was medically retired from work be occupational health anc had consultants letters stating she was not fit for work aswell as the occupational health report. she had to jump through lots of hoops to get PIP even having to go to an assessment when really she shouldnt have had to as consultants (plural) and occupational health had said she wasnt aloud to work again and should actually bebon bed rest or in a wheelchair...
    My best friend's mother was in a very similar situation, only she was refused any award after her assessment even though she's clearly no longer able to work. She appealed the decision with my help - no further evidence was supplied besides my letter, and that letter was simply to point out all the huge flaws in the assessment report and the complete lack of any acknowledgement of any of the documents she'd provided with her application. It took a letter from me with my job title on, to actually make them do their ****ing job.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by It's****ingWOODY)
    A large chunk of the population are ignorant to disability and to them, "disabled" means "in a wheelchair". This figure means practically nothing.
    It won't let me rep you, but I completely agree with you. They also seem to think that if you're in a wheelchair that means you can't walk under any circumstances, which is a bizarre notion, but there you go. :lol:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by It's****ingWOODY)
    My best friend's mother was in a very similar situation, only she was refused any award after her assessment even though she's clearly no longer able to work. She appealed the decision with my help - no further evidence was supplied besides my letter, and that letter was simply to point out all the huge flaws in the assessment report and the complete lack of any acknowledgement of any of the documents she'd provided with her application. It took a letter from me with my job title on, to actually make them do their ****ing job.
    yeah. my ex mother in law was awarded PIP luckily but the stress of going through the waiting and the assessment didnt help any of her illnesses and disabilities!
    people on benefits are treated so badly by so many people!
    like i could potentially apply for PIP for my illnesses but the stress and hassle isnt worth it for me i dont think.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PandaWho)
    my ex partners mum was medically retired from work be occupational health anc had consultants letters stating she was not fit for work aswell as the occupational health report. she had to jump through lots of hoops to get PIP even having to go to an assessment when really she shouldnt have had to as consultants (plural) and occupational health had said she wasnt aloud to work again and should actually bebon bed rest or in a wheelchair...

    My comments were directed to ESA and not any letter from a consultant but one in the terms I indicated.

    I don't agree with you about no assessment either. When IDS introduced PIP the clear intention was to assess everyone. This system couldn't cope and that was reduced. They should as soon as practicable be returning to 5 yearly assessments for all PIP claimants.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by It's****ingWOODY)
    A large chunk of the population are ignorant to disability and to them, "disabled" means "in a wheelchair". This figure means practically nothing.
    I don't agree with you. The normal processes of aging are becoming a disability.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    My comments were directed to ESA and not any letter from a consultant but one in the terms I indicated.

    I don't agree with you about no assessment either. When IDS introduced PIP the clear intention was to assess everyone. This system couldn't cope and that was reduced. They should as soon as practicable be returning to 5 yearly assessments for all PIP claimants.
    ESA was such a hirrible benefit to be under. it was a complete joke that me and my partner went for 3 months living off his DLA of about £160 a month because it had taken them over a year to assess our joint claim. we were living off food banks and having family help us out. we were treated appalingly by job centre staff.
    i was deffinately treated worse under a disability claim than i am now on UC not under disability.

    there should be no need for assessnents if there is already supporting evidence from consultants and occupational health who have known the person and been treating their illnesses!!!
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by It's****ingWOODY)
    When you consider that approximately 18% of working age adults in the UK are disabled
    Can I ask your source for that figure? Apologies if it's been given, I haven't followed the thread all the way through.

    To be honest I just became a good deal more sceptical of your position for having seen it. In fact I think, if I wanted to discredit an argument that the benefits system is too harsh on disability claimants, pointing out that 'disability' is being used in such a way as to encompass pretty well a fifth of the working age population of the UK would be quite high on my to-do list.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    They should as soon as practicable be returning to 5 yearly assessments for all PIP claimants.
    Why/ What's the point of testing people like me whose disabilities are only either going to get worse or not change? Seems pointless and just a waste of money. And then you've got people like my brother who was born with his learning disability. He's suddenly not going to get better either.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    My comments were directed to ESA and not any letter from a consultant but one in the terms I indicated.

    I don't agree with you about no assessment either. When IDS introduced PIP the clear intention was to assess everyone. This system couldn't cope and that was reduced. They should as soon as practicable be returning to 5 yearly assessments for all PIP claimants.
    Reassessment for people who won't improve is a waste of tax payers money.

    Bet you'll have problems with a small minority of people in the Support Group of ESA that, from their next WCA (after 29/09/2017), will no longer be getting reassessed due to their disabilities. :rolleyes:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/public...september-2017
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pathway)
    Reassessment for people who won't improve is a waste of tax payers money.
    Plus there are backlogs. I can't say I'd be too happy waiting to be assessed because someone who clearly isn't going to get better is getting reassessed.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tiger Rag)
    Plus there are backlogs. I can't say I'd be too happy waiting to be assessed because someone who clearly isn't going to get better is getting reassessed.
    I wouldn't be happy either.

    Thankfully for both ESA and PIP mine have gone thought pretty quick (although I'm obviously waiting for the outcome of PIP now). I know some people who have waited months for their outcomes. :erm:
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    No that isn't right. "Acceptable standard" is the quality of undertaking the activity when it is undertaken. What you are addressing is "repeatedly" which means as often as the activity being assessed is reasonably required to be completed. That is the PIP definition but ESA is not materially different. And of course what has to be undertaken repeatedly is the activity in the assessment not driving a car. One can use being able to steer a car as a proxy for the task of being able to lift and move an empty cardboard box but what has to be able to be done repeatedly is lift and move the box, not drive the car.
    The "acceptable standard" was ignored completely at my assessment on almost everything. It was just "can you..." "no because..." "I see no reason why she can't" Even though I had evidence stating the opposite and they had none.

    You also can't base the assessment on that one day.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tiger Rag)
    Why/ What's the point of testing people like me whose disabilities are only either going to get worse or not change? Seems pointless and just a waste of money. And then you've got people like my brother who was born with his learning disability. He's suddenly not going to get better either.
    (Original post by Pathway)
    Reassessment for people who won't improve is a waste of tax payers money.

    Bet you'll have problems with a small minority of people in the Support Group of ESA that, from their next WCA (after 29/09/2017), will no longer be getting reassessed due to their disabilities. :rolleyes:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/public...september-2017
    Because under DLA there were people who disappeared into a black hole for almost 20 years who supposedly weren't going to get any better but in fact when reassessed for PIP were found not to meet the requirements for PIP or DLA.

    The change for ESA is sensible as long as it isn't used for Regulation 35 (exceptional circumstances) cases. You can't be placed in the Support Group under a totting provision, Multiple less severe problems aren't enough.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by It's****ingWOODY)
    A large chunk of the population are ignorant to disability and to them, "disabled" means "in a wheelchair". This figure means practically nothing.
    PRSOM

    That said, even if you use a wheelchair like my mother's did it' still no guarentee. The process is bs and it' just a job to the assessors. They don' care.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Because under DLA there were people who disappeared into a black hole for almost 20 years who supposedly weren't going to get any better but in fact when reassessed for PIP were found not to meet the requirements for PIP or DLA.

    The change for ESA is sensible as long as it isn't used for Regulation 35 (exceptional circumstances) cases. You can't be placed in the Support Group under a totting provision, Multiple less severe problems aren't enough.
    But the criteria for pip is different.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.