Abolishing the triple lock, privatising the NHS and using immigration as a poverty alleviation tool- will Reform UK win over or lose voters with such policies?

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MT62

Galaxy

I wouldnt support any government that doesn't look at the considerable increase in young people claiming pip, etc - I would think they were negligent.

👏👏👏

The current government is looking at PIP and proposing to make eligibility for PIP payments more strict.

Do you have any suggestions what the government could do?

Or do you agree with Reform UK proposal to instead abolish PIP and the Universal Credit Health element entirely apart form the most enduring high risk cases though no criteria given as to what the health status of the most enduring high risk claimants' might look like- who will instead receive cash support of an unknown amount. Not a lot of detail there. Plus there is Reform talk of restricting benefit entitlements to UK nationals also.

Obviously you can discuss whatever you wish with your husband at any time. Your fired has not provided facts of her PIP claim so you are passing on merely what she has mentioned and shared your concern that you think what your fiend is doing 'is not right' ie s potentially committing fraud- as you've also told us about your concerns.

You told us your husband "just lifted his hands & said, ‘don’t tell me a bloody thing’, he was really annoyed'.

Your friend would have been moved to PIP when it was introduced in 2013- the transition process was completed by the latest 2016. If your fiend has mentioned to you that she would be moving to PIP eventually evidently she either is not claiming anymore and is not aware that DLA has transitioned to PIP or she has chosen to not mention that she is claiming PIP now and not DLA. Either way you are not in receipt of the full facts. You have speculated as a result of what she has mentioned.

Your friend tells you what she wants to know at any given time and as you say she has a mental health condition. You can only know for sure if she has committed fraud if you have access to her PIP claim declaration, her full health records and have full insight into how her health condition impacts on her declared. daily activities of living declarations.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Bi-polar disorder is well known to be a fluctuating condition and changes over time

A PIP claimant has to demonstrate and declare that their BPD condition symptoms across a 12 month period combine to meet a 50% days of the year impact- called the 50% rule

There is also a 'Reliability Test' whereby the DWP assesses if a person can do the tasks of daily living they declare limited, safely, to an acceptable standard and in a reasonable time. For example teaching all day full time can exhaust functional capacity meaning that after work a person cannot perform their declared basic tasks safely or repeatedly at home. There will be periodic checks.

Thus it can legitimately be the case that anyone can meet up with a claimant friend day when they appear fine. Yet on another day not so fine and their declared MH functional daily living tasks are limited and adversely impacted. They may not admit this to you (pride) and you may not observe such decline as you are not present.

Fraudulent claimants do not diminish the need for the benefit by way of their fraudulent claim. There are systems in place to deal with fraudulent claimants.

The separate issue of whether a benefit is appropriate and what should be the eligibility criteria is up for fair political debate.

Reform UK propose to change eligibility criteria restricting all benefit claims to UK nationals. On paper that may kill any current none UK nationals Reform UK votes from voting in the future for Reform UK, who claim any type of UK benefit, including for example benefits over state pension age. So for example the Windrush generation, who were invited over to the UK by the government of the day, to contribute to the NHS, TFL etc have paid taxes and contributed to society and made their lives here now discriminated against.

PIP is not based of employment status. It's for anyone under State pension age- above that Attendance Allowance replaces PIP eligibility. PIP based on long term physical and/or mental health conditions that lead to daily living or mobility challenges.

It's assessed on 2 components with points awarded for limitations in specific areas- all can be seen on Gov.UKPIP eligibility page. Points accrue for all the various tasks that is listed, prevented by the declared physical or MH condition. Points then all added up. It's not a means tested or work tested benefit. 4 points may be accrued for example of needing assistance to manage incontinence needs as unable to do so independently or needing an aid or appliance for toileting management. Another example- needing prompting or assistance to make simple financial decisions and manage budget because bale to do so independently as a result of a learning disability or MH issues.

The government is proposing a 4 point rule where a claimant must score 4 points in at least one of the daily living activities to qualify for the daily living comment of the PIP payment- ie making it more difficult to qualify.

8-11 points leads to PIP paid at standard rate- 12 or more points to PIP payable at enhanced rate. The daily living comment prt of PIIP is to help with any support act may be needed for such daily tasks. They can be in full time employment for example but PIP may help pay for counselling, CBT sessions, housework or gardening support, taxi fares to and from work, or to purchase a car if a physically limiting condition for example, absolutely whatever that person decides to helps them live with their long term condition.

I would just add to this, DWP has specialist fraud departments which deal with all benefits and potential fraud, they also have compliance.

Anyone, anonymously, can report anything or anyone they feel is “wrong” or potential fraud.

It’s entirely the right thing to do.

Anyone claiming legitimately has nothing to fear.

Anyone deliberately claiming knowing they’ve “lied” deserves all they get.

Anyone falling in between these two will be referred to compliance and will be advised on how to move forward, stop claiming if not meeting the criteria, and not be prosecuted or penalised.

It’s not right to fraudulently claim any benefit to which you’re not entitled, but it’s also not right to make judgements on situations where you might not know the full facts or situations.

I have supported a couple of people in Job Centre plus interviews after being reported as an Appropriate Adult.

On each occasion the interviewers ask them to confirm how much £ PIP they receive per month and how they spend it. They then show them most recent claim form completed and ask for confirmation the signature on the form is theirs. Then the interviewer read out the first question on the their most recent claim form and asked the claimant to read out what they had written in reply. They asked was this factually correct at time of signed declaration. Then the next question outlined in form similar way. This seemed to throw all the people I supported. So I suggested a break to fully explain the process (again) and that I would be happy to read out both the questions and their written answers for them- so they could simply give their answer- but all the questions on the form would be addressed.

On each occasion after a few more line by line questions, they each admitted they had not read the form in full, or someone else had completed and they just signed and each said they had not fully realised they had to update a change in circumstances and that they had not fully understood what they were signing for in the 'declaration' at the end.

They then admitted they had thus signed the form in error and admitted they were not eligible for the PIP payment at time of signing the most recent form. So then taken to previous declaration. I asked for another break to explain this would continue for each retrospective form in order to find out at what stage their circumstances had in fact changed as they had just explained.

The interview question process then continued to find out date the circumstances had changed reminding them the interview was being recorded. One claimant was shown video Facebook evidence of their physical abilities downloaded from Facebook posts of claimant in a social setting with friends, being able to run, not breathless as claimed etc. and asked date of video- evidently known. Admissions followed in every claimant I have supported.

Message removed as it refers to a post we've withdrawn.

The lady had get together with you and other friends and she has/had a MH condition. If she's under 70 years old and she's told you she's on DLA- that can hardly be the case as she would have been automatically moved over to PIP. Employment does alter eligibility for PIP.

As a result of all potential fraud reports, DWP will investigate using specialised "Authorised Officers" to investigate suspected PIP fraud. The powers include conducting direct surveillance, compelling third party data and bank information, and gathering digital and/or physical evidence.

If that investigation finds evidence of potential fraud your friend will then be asked to attend a job centre plus recorded interview, under caution, at a designated time/date. In that interview she will be taken line by line through her latest signed PIP claim form (all claimants must sign periodically that their claim detail remains true and accurate and must report any changes). That is the evidential basis to prove a fraudulent act.

Line by line your friend will be asked to provide information and evidence to support all aspects of her claim- or alternatively declare changes in circumstances. She can take someone with her and if deemed vulnerable will be offered the support of an Appropriate Adult.

If your friend has made a fraudulent claim a mandatory repayment of overpaid monies will be levied automatically. In addition either civil monetary penalties or criminal prosecution, leading to a criminal record, fines, benefits loss, or up to 7 years in prison.

If she's a good friend, has a history of MH issues and you can accept that what she has told you is in all possibility unreliable- let it go in one ear and out the other? However as you appear to have judged her as committing fraud on her PIP claim because she is able to work full time in a teaching post- report.

its important to note that working full time whilst claiming PIP does not necessarily evidence a fraudulent PIP claim as employment is allowed. Having said that if you dislike what you have judged as fraud- report.

DLA is only still available for children under the age of 16 or older adults born on or before 1948 who were already claiming DLA- so coming up for 80 years old.

All working adults born after 8 April 1948 has been moved over to PIP. Gossip is not reliable.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message removed as it quotes a post we've withdrawn.

Galaxy

I wouldnt support any government that doesn't look at the considerable increase in young people claiming pip, etc - I would think they were negligent.

👏👏👏

I wouldnt support any government that doesn't look at the considerable increase in young people claiming pip, etc - I would think they were negligent.

The welfare bill is also supporting over a million graduates who are looking for work. Their young lives are blighted by rejection and the need to claim benefits.
It's a disgrace that young fit people who are desperate for work can't get jobs. There is one job for ever 49 applicants last time I checked. Possibly worse now .

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Julie Burchill who I disagree with often is a phenomenal writer.

I agree Cossy. The NHS, Civil Service, public sector organisations are more willing to make reasonable adjustments perhaps? Working can improve health and well being when it give a person purpose and an income.

It would be great to see a government scheme that encourages more private companies, of all sizes, to make reasonable adjustments to support the recruitment of new employees who have a long term condition or disability, perhaps with some type of incentive. It might also prove cost effective in context of reducing welfare bill.

Interestingly, when I was a civil servant, and I do have conditions considered disabilities, I worked with many more colleagues who were disabled, and very visibly so, than I ever did in my various private sector job roles, at which I spent 75% of my working life.

It’s quite hard sometimes to persuade companies to take on people with disabilities, despite all the legal protections.

Companies, often wrongly, consider them to be a liability. In the same way, back in the day, some organisations didn’t wish to employ women, because they might “swan off to have children”.

In one particular jobcentre I worked alongside two blind colleagues (one brought her dog in with her), they both had additional software on their computers to be able to speak their notes etc, one deaf person, two people in wheelchairs, all of these were visibly disabled. Then two colleagues I knew well had serious diagnosed mental health disorders. All this in one location.

Sometimes, when seeing claimants claiming to be “too ill too work” it was pretty hard not to point out colleagues and very bluntly say, “if they can work, so can you”.

Think we simply need more resources for helping the disabled to do some form of paid work, even for a few hours each day or week and less stigma among employers to consider employing them in the first instance.

It really should be easier now, with lots of jobs still able to offer hybrid working and I absolutely believe paid work brings with it an entire package of benefits outside of those obvious financial ones.

Happygirl79

Cossy

Reform won’t lose my vote as they never had it and never ever will 🤣🤣🥳🥳

Ditto

Ditto. But I wonder whether it will lose their usual Reform voters..

I don’t think reform are the answer
but that system needs a good overhauling imo whoever is in.

I know exactly what pip/DLA is Cossy. I also know it can be abused.
To stay on DLA/PIP when a person is totally well imo is just plain wrong.
Same with attendance allowance. I know a lady who’s almost blind, several other serious conditions was knocked back, (finally got it after appealing).
Yet someone else I knew hardly anything wrong got it no problem.