Jump to content
Heather Mills - Amputee Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Lizzie2

Disability Living Allowance debate

Recommended Posts

Hi :smile:

I hope everyone's keeping well?

(Sorry, folks: Rant Alert)

For those of you in the UK, I thought you may be interested in the following broadcast on the

.

I've heard a couple of radio debates on the subject today, that involved Maria Miller (Minister for the Disabled). She has shown herself to be patronising, lacking in understanding of life with a disability and full of political spin. Whilst the other members of the debate(s) have put forward thoughful, considered responses that were backed up with evidence.

:angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm amazed that there haven't been any replies here, when there have been on Facebook!

Anyway, a quick update:

As things stand, single amputees will find it hard to get the new mobility component of the PIP (Personal Independence Payment), whilst bilateral amps will only be able to get the standard rate ... this compares to blind people who will be able to get the enhanced rate. This would have a big impact upon an amps mobility if, for example, they have a Motability car.

However, you now have a chance to have your say, and to hopefully get changes made to the assessment criteria.

Therefore, it is essential that you read the following document and reply by the 30th April 2012 ~ PIP assessment thresholds and consultation.

:smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Lizzie - haven't been on line much lately, our internet is giving problems but this is something I will go and look at.

Sue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've looked through this several times and keep coming back to the same conclusion.

It looks like this scheme is going to go ahead no matter what anybody says but once it is in place there'll be a bucket load of headlines in the local and national press featuring people that have had their cars and associated benefits taken away. Eventually there'll be enough that the government will be forced to adjust the criteria. Either that or individuals will have to appeal and present their cases effectively.

On the subject of Motability, don't forget that this is really just a scheme designed to allow manufacturers to sell shed loads of new cars and is not much different from a standard PCP finance deal other than the inclusion of insurance and servicing. This is evidenced by the annual mileage allowance being little more than the UK average despite the vehicles being intended for people that are likely to use them far more than your average driver and the rather limited choice of vehicles and options. The manufacturers aren't going to want to lose these sales so either the Motability scheme will be open to standard rate claimants from the start or it will become so very soon after the change takes place.

I do however question the logic that a person who has no mobility problems but lacks the mental capacity to cross a road safely qualifies for the Motability scheme but someone who needs a wheelchair to move more than 50 metres does not.

My greatest fear is not so much the reduction of the benefit but the associated benefits that are "passported" along with the higher rate mobility component such as automatic blue badge qualification, the car tax exemption and VAT exemption on adapted vehicles. Without these I would struggle to be able to afford suitable vehicles, to get in or out of my vehicle and to get to or from my final destination once I've found a parking space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the subject of Motability, don't forget that this is really just a scheme designed to allow manufacturers to sell shed loads of new cars and is not much different from a standard PCP finance deal other than the inclusion of insurance and servicing. This is evidenced by the annual mileage allowance being little more than the UK average despite the vehicles being intended for people that are likely to use them far more than your average driver and the rather limited choice of vehicles and options. The manufacturers aren't going to want to lose these sales so either the Motability scheme will be open to standard rate claimants from the start or it will become so very soon after the change takes place.

I do however question the logic that a person who has no mobility problems but lacks the mental capacity to cross a road safely qualifies for the Motability scheme but someone who needs a wheelchair to move more than 50 metres does not.

Excellent observations... trouble with it all is that those that want to fiddle the system will still get around it somehow, but those who really need help are the kind of people who naturally won't argue too much when it's taken away... it's not in their nature to 'make a fuss'...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Lizzie, I've only just picked up on this on here, but as you know I am extremely concerned about this and have been active writing letters and speaking to my MP.

I can only say that for me, as a bilateral amputee of quite a few years, I am tremendously appreciative of DLA. To those in Government who are trying to axe this allowance, I would tell them that personally DLA has allowed me to keep my independence, to independently look after my family and be a hands on mum, I know without this life would have been very different for the whole family, I understand this allowance was brought in to help people with the extra costs of living with a disability, and would say to anyone who doesn't realize, having a disability does make you very high maintenance and those extra costs re-bound on the whole family. At the weekend I heard IDS saying that they were cutting benefits to make people more independent, this really doesn't add up in the case of DLA particularly for complex amputees. As Grum says, its the extra help that DLA brings, like access to Blue Badges which make parking easier and less costly (we usually don't have the choice of being able to take public transport, or walk) and of course Motability, accessible cars and their help with adaptations to cars which in the UK we are required to have. Not to mention help from other components of DLA which some people are able to access to help with daily living costs.

However active we try to be, just being an amputee does take its toll and as I am now realizing does catch up on us earlier than would be the norm for others and now find in order to keep stable I have to very much juggle what I do and what I don't do, its quite a balancing act and not always easy but something I don't think I'd be managing so well without DLA.

I also feel very sorry that in the future people in a similar position to me might be denied this opportunity to live as independently as I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully understand I will get shot down in flames and be accused of being contrary, but I promise I am not trying to upset anyone. I have an opinion that is as valid as anyone else's. I feel strongly that there are people who recieve DLA who do not have a need for it. I hope that if these reforms do go through, then at least these people will be weedled out and the money can be given to those who really need it. It is these people that have increased the cost of DLA and forced the government to look at ways of saving money.

I don't know anyone's situation on this site, so wouldn't suggest for one second that anyone here is being fraudulant, but I do know people in real life who get DLA and blatantly shouldn't.

I don't believe the figures I've heard quoted that there is a very small amount of fraud, I think it's wider spread than we realise.

I only hope that with these reforms, the people who really need the assistance will continue to get it, whilst removing it from those who have been cheating the system for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully understand I will get shot down in flames and be accused of being contrary, but I promise I am not trying to upset anyone. I have an opinion that is as valid as anyone else's. I feel strongly that there are people who recieve DLA who do not have a need for it. I hope that if these reforms do go through, then at least these people will be weedled out and the money can be given to those who really need it. It is these people that have increased the cost of DLA and forced the government to look at ways of saving money.

I don't know anyone's situation on this site, so wouldn't suggest for one second that anyone here is being fraudulant, but I do know people in real life who get DLA and blatantly shouldn't.

I don't believe the figures I've heard quoted that there is a very small amount of fraud, I think it's wider spread than we realise.

I only hope that with these reforms, the people who really need the assistance will continue to get it, whilst removing it from those who have been cheating the system for years.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions OBL and I was just talking about my own appreciation for it, I can tell you though as a bilateral amputee, at this point in my life, my everyday living is very much affected by my condition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully understand I will get shot down in flames and be accused of being contrary, but I promise I am not trying to upset anyone. I have an opinion that is as valid as anyone else's. I feel strongly that there are people who recieve DLA who do not have a need for it. I hope that if these reforms do go through, then at least these people will be weedled out and the money can be given to those who really need it. It is these people that have increased the cost of DLA and forced the government to look at ways of saving money.

I don't know anyone's situation on this site, so wouldn't suggest for one second that anyone here is being fraudulant, but I do know people in real life who get DLA and blatantly shouldn't.

I don't believe the figures I've heard quoted that there is a very small amount of fraud, I think it's wider spread than we realise.

I only hope that with these reforms, the people who really need the assistance will continue to get it, whilst removing it from those who have been cheating the system for years.

Have you analysed the DWP figures? If not, then I suggest you do.

As I understand, the increase in DLA claimants has been because -

a) People have been able to stay on the benefit after the age of 65. This was a Conservative initiative.

b) Since the 1980's there has been a big increase in claimants who have mental health problems and learning disabilities (the increase in people with learning disabilities is because, before the 1980's, they were not in the community, but housed in 'asylums').

There has not, as so many people think, been a proportionally high increase in the number of people with physical disabilities claiming DLA - this has largely remained at the same level.

However, as physical disabilities are easier to see, it seems that the press (and others!) use them to illustrate that there is a massive amount of DLA fraud (which there is not - DLA has the lowest level of fraud).

As things stand, people such as myself, Ann (both bilateral amps) and Baroness Thompson (a wheelchair user) will not qualify for the highest rate of PIP (Personal Independence Payment) mobility component, although we qualify now ... the reason being is that aids and adaptions are to be seen as making us as good as new (i.e. as able as an able bodied person). Anyone who thinks this is just, needs to seriously re-evaluate their view point. Have you not thought that some people may not want to challenge their reduction in benefits because of attitudes (i.e. 'I'm alright Jack') like yours? Not everyone has a healthy (single) residual limb, good health, a good job, a well fitting limb and a wife at home ... many of us find life a very big struggle!

People like you, OBL, do nothing to help situations such as these. All you seem to do is pontificate and you do not appear to have any empathy or compassion for others ... many of who will be severely affected by these changes.

@Grum ~ like many bilateral amps (of who there are only I couldn't afford (physically and financially) for these changes to take place. Also, the reason why someone with a learning disability needs a mobility component is because they need someone with them to escort them ~ some have quite profound behavioural disorders that make things like crossing a road very hazardous.

To everyone else: you may be interested in reading these webpages ~

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.com/2012/01/i-support-spartacus-report.html

http://benefitscroungingscum.blogspot.com/

http://www.bhfederation.org.uk/component/k2/item/1493-government-caught-out-on-dla-statistics-again.html

http://wearespartacus.org.uk/

http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/files/response_to_proposed_dla_reforms.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully understand I will get shot down in flames and be accused of being contrary, but I promise I am not trying to upset anyone. I have an opinion that is as valid as anyone else's. I feel strongly that there are people who recieve DLA who do not have a need for it. I hope that if these reforms do go through, then at least these people will be weedled out and the money can be given to those who really need it. It is these people that have increased the cost of DLA and forced the government to look at ways of saving money.

I don't know anyone's situation on this site, so wouldn't suggest for one second that anyone here is being fraudulant, but I do know people in real life who get DLA and blatantly shouldn't.

I don't believe the figures I've heard quoted that there is a very small amount of fraud, I think it's wider spread than we realise.

I only hope that with these reforms, the people who really need the assistance will continue to get it, whilst removing it from those who have been cheating the system for years.

Oneblueleg,

After reading your post I felt that I had to respond to some of the points that you raised.

First off who said that you could have an opinion? :blush:

I just have to know:-

Who do you know who gets DLA who doesn’t need it? , I am certain that you are mistaken on this point surly people wouldn’t clame it if they didn’t think that they were entitled to it , are you suggesting that there are dishonest people out there? Surly not! I am shocked to even read such a thing. :blink:

Be haps they tick no when they really meant yes on one of the many pages that they had to fill in after all its so much easier to say no rather than fill in more paperwork explaining that sometimes you can, I am certain that these small misunderstanding will easily be explained away, or perhaps when they took the form to a local solicitor to fill in on their behalf they missed out some of the facts there is bound to be a good reason.

Fraud in this country certainly not I am shocked!! (At this point I have to sit down for a few minutes)

Or perhaps they have been brought up that it is there god given right to get benefits because he/ she gets it down the road.

Now because you have this” I’m alright jack attitude” I feel that you need to go back to work and do some extra hours so you can pay more taxes to bail this country out of the mess it’s in !.It people like you who work and pay taxes all their lives are responsible for this mess that we are all in.

if I didn’t know better I would suggest that you are a city banker.

And another thing I bet you are one of these lucky people who are married, get your limb from the local NHS and…………………..you are only a single above knee, you know nothing about being an amputee. :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are only a single above knee, you know nothing about being an amputee. :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

Clearly! well put Mick! (by the way, my amputation isn't my only disability... sometimes it's the least of my worries!)

ann.... I specifically said that I knew nothing about anyone's situation on here.... so why you feel the need to explain yourself I have no idea!

Lizzie2.... I specifically said I don't believe the figures and that I know people, in my own experience, that do not qualify for DLA yet claim it....

I really do put a vast amount of effort into having an opinion without trying to upset anyone... I need more lessons obviously...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mick - if you have resort to sarcasm, when talking about such a serious subject, then you're being very insulting to those of us who do deserve the benefit.

I really do put a vast amount of effort into having an opinion without trying to upset anyone...

Then, seeing as you know from past postings on DLA that many of us do not agree with you, why have you replied?

Also, unless you are a health professional who has assessed someone in receipt of DLA, you are not qualified to give an opinion on their claim. They may, for example, have a hidden disability ... and it may be the only day they've been mobile in a month.

This is a public forum and this thread is about PIP ... if you want to argue the point then create your own thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really meaning to interrupt this conversation...no, really, I'm not!...but since there seem to be a variety of opinions being expressed here, would it be possible for a few of you folks to give me an idea of just what this entire program (DLA vs. PIP) covers, and for whom? I remember a few other discussions of DLA on here, and as a Yank, it just seems terribly perplexing to me. Lizzie's links seem to presume that the reader is a Brit and knows the history...if there's some "background" out there for a curious Californian, I'd be interested, as it sometimes (often!) seems like you Brits have some creative ways of dealing with disabilities that we in the US don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really meaning to interrupt this conversation...no, really, I'm not!...but since there seem to be a variety of opinions being expressed here, would it be possible for a few of you folks to give me an idea of just what this entire program (DLA vs. PIP) covers, and for whom? I remember a few other discussions of DLA on here, and as a Yank, it just seems terribly perplexing to me. Lizzie's links seem to presume that the reader is a Brit and knows the history...if there's some "background" out there for a curious Californian, I'd be interested, as it sometimes (often!) seems like you Brits have some creative ways of dealing with disabilities that we in the US don't.

From memory Cheryl, disability living allowance was introduced in the late 1970/80's to help people with disabilities with the additional costs of living with a disability. It is currently broken down, I think, into levels of lower, medium and higher rate of the mobility component and living component, and people are assessed and awarded the allowance depending on the severity of their condition, which could be any condition eg a physical condition, chronic or terminal illness, learning diffs, mental health probs etc. etc.

People are usually assessed for this, but more recently certain conditions that are not likely to improve as in the case of people with more than one limb missing have been awarded the higher rate of the mobility component of DLA automatically. This also gave people access to other things such as Blue Badges for parking in disability bays, and access to Motability, a government sponsored charity which allows people on higher rate DLA to lease (through their allowance and a deposit) cars, mobility scooters, etc. etc., also helps with adaptations etc.

However as you prob are aware, over here there are massive public spending cuts and welfare/benefit cuts happening, and they are reforming welfare and as part of this Disability Living Allowance is being replaced by Personal Independence Payments http://www.disabilityalliance.org/f60.htm and those with the conditions that automatically gave them access to the previous DLA will not have this under PIP.

The Government are saying that the new assessment strategies will route out fraudulent claimers etc and be better for the people who need it, however, this not really being believed as we know the government are wanting to reduce spending, this is already happening in many areas of public services, added to this are rumours about the company contracted to carry out the assessments etc. etc., and already we are hearing about people with quite severe disabilities not being assessed properly, allowances being cut etc. etc.

I probably haven't explained that well, so I am sure someone will come back with a better explanation, but it is quite a big issue over here at the moment.

I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you've explained DLA pretty well, Ann. :smile:

Cheryl ~ it's basically a benefit to help with travel and care costs. It was originally aimed at people of working age, to help to keep them in employment. But, now it's extended to everyone with a significant, longstanding disability after the age of retirement, if it is claimed before the age of retirement (i.e. 65). It helps me a massive amount - without it I wouldn't be able to work (albeit part-time work). Children have also been able to claim it ... and David Cameron and his wife claimed DLA for their disabled son (who sadly passed away not too long ago).

Ann and I are bilateral, as you know, so we have a substantially more significant disability than others who have contributed to this thread. We have also both worked closely, supporting amputees locally and so we know that most amputees do not walk and that many have additional health problems ... problems that will not be taken into account in the new PIP assessment (as they will only assess one condition).

As the government wish to reduce disability benefits (for whatever reason?), there has been a massive amount of propaganda in the press ... to be on the receiving end, it's felt like a 'witch hunt'. Even for someone like myself, who has a very complex disability, it has felt like people have been watching me ... it's been horrible! The sad fact is that DLA (old benefit, soon to become PIP) has the lowest rate of fraud, apart from the State Pension. Despite what OBL and Mick say, it is very difficult to qualify for DLA.

My (and Ann's) concern is that amputees haven't been adequately represented in the consultation process. I (we) feel that other disabilities have been better represented (e.g. someone with sensory loss or autism is more likely to be awarded the higher rate mobility components than me, despite the fact that I will probably qualify for the higher care component) ... it doesn't make sense! The reason is that the new PIP benefit, as it stands, will see using aids and adaptations as making you function as an ablebodied person. Everyone knows what rubbish that it! ... as we get tired, we have other health issues, our limbs break and malfunction, we get issues with our residual limbs, we develop arthritis in our upper body ... etc. So, I (and others) have, in the background, been lobbying for a recognition of the true cost of using aids and adaptations.

Yes, I realise that other countries do not have this benefit. But, they sometimes make up for it in other ways, such as a good accessible and affordable transport system, better prosthetic provision, cheaper fuel, better equal opportunities ... etc. We do appreciate this benefit ... those of us who qualify, that is.

Negative attitudes (with quotes about widespread fraud ... etc, which have been shown, with the occasional exception, to be untrue) on forums such as these do very little to promote our case ... they sadden me and sicken me, quite honestly, as they show an ignorance of and a blantant disregard for what others have to cope with.

I would just like to say one last thing with respect to fraud: I am self-employed (very part-time, as I physically couldn't cope with full-time), but some of you, I know, are employees. If you post on this forum at work, does your employer know and do they sanction you posting on here? If not, then that IMHO is stealing ...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really meaning to interrupt this conversation...no, really, I'm not!...but since there seem to be a variety of opinions being expressed here, would it be possible for a few of you folks to give me an idea of just what this entire program (DLA vs. PIP) covers, and for whom? I remember a few other discussions of DLA on here, and as a Yank, it just seems terribly perplexing to me. Lizzie's links seem to presume that the reader is a Brit and knows the history...if there's some "background" out there for a curious Californian, I'd be interested, as it sometimes (often!) seems like you Brits have some creative ways of dealing with disabilities that we in the US don't.

Hi Cheryl wasn’t going to write anymore on this subject but seeing as I been mentioned by name I think I will………where to start .

I basically agree with most that has been written, (bit of a surprise eh!) but if I may I would like to take this slightly further with a bit more background info that you might or might not know.

We in Britain have what’s known as the welfare state, I believe its origins started in earnest at the end of the Second World War. Where a basic frame work was laid down, over the years there have been lots and lots of stuff added to it. (This is very basic) it has been tweaked, altered and basically grown into the system that we enjoy to day.

It basically covers every thing from your birth to your death.

I.e. payments for child benefit , school meals, uniforms , higher education , unemployment , health care , dentist , housing , job seeking basically any benefits the list is endless over the years there has been so much added to it and various layers it would take a very very smart person months just to sit down and go over every thing . It has of course been messed around with by every party that’s came into power and even the most simple benefit has layers upon layers of paperwork and red tape added to it. Making it a very good but very hard system to find you way around. it goes without saying over the years it has grown and grown in its cost to the country and, in the past no political party would seriously try to alter it because of the public outrage so it has grown into something that this country can not afford to keep paying (many will disagree with that statement) but it was deemed political suicide to mess with it.

However that all changed rather suddenly when the banks crashed and the S..T hit the fan , add to the mix a hung parliament where two parties joined together to try to form a government . One of the first things this government set out to do was reduce it outgoing costs targeting amounts many other things the welfare state.

It goes without saying as soon as these cuts where announced all the major players starting getting sorted by lobbying there mp”s fighting there corner to protect there particular benefit, throw into the mix a bit of propaganda (like they are shining examples of humanity) from the press about anyone one benefits is living the high life ect things are looking down.

This now brings us to this thread.

As you have read DLA is made up out of two parts living allowance and mobilility

Each having different levels attached to it. You can get both or either and depending on what level you get depend on the amount of money you get.

I am not going to say anything more about DLA as it is a very difficult subject however I am going to say a few things about the mobility side of this benefit , it is open to and is abused despite what other members say ,

With your say so Cheryl (you can always delete this post) I will go on and say why.

I won’t go into what you need or don’t need to qualify for this (look for yourself via goggle)

But even in my local town , you cant walk down the shopping hall without being accosted by people asking you very direct questions , starting with the have you had an accident in the last few years , as soon as you say yes to any question they will Wisk you away and start the clams process (naturally there is a fee involved but hey you could get lots of money out of this ) they will do all the paperwork , they will also do a benefit check for you and again if there is a slightest chance of any money they will (for a fee) chase the clam up and most importantly do the all important paperwork . And it goes without saying they know exactly what wording to use.

In my circle of friends/workmates ECT there are over ten people using mobility cars, out of that ten I have to be honest and say at least five shouldn’t have them. Now if I know five what’s the % with the rest of the population? Which makes me ask the question are these figures quoted correct, we all know how easy it is to make the figures say what you want them to and believe me any government body is even worse.

Now before anyone jumps one and states that I don’t know these people or there circumstances, I have to say that I do very well.

Some examples I traveled over to the lakes last year twice in a mobility car with the person concerned and climbed up Skiddaw Mountain one week and Blencathra the following week (not bad for a person with mobility problems eh)

Another one plays rugby every week I could go on and on but I have gone off the subject now.

So Basically Cheryl that’s my take on this subject , I don’t have any faith that the new system PIP will be any better when it comes in, it is a cost cutting exercise nothing more nothing less. I also think that people who abuse the system will still abuse it and nothing I write on here will change that .even with my negative attitude towards the benefits.

Not sure how using this forum at work fits in with PIP !

You did ask Cheryl. :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the background info, gang...it gives me a way of trying to relate it to some programs we do have, don't have, and/or might want to have here across the pond.

While the discussion here on the forum seems to be pretty "testy," I don't think anyone's truly said or done anything I'd consider out-of-line. Opinions are opinions and sharing them can sometimes bring about some good ideas. And, as many of us are discovering during this worldwide "economic crisis," there seems to be a tendency among government agencies and members of the media to locate a group to be the scapegoat for the problem. And that means that folks with very legitimate needs can be lumped in with folks who simply know how to "scam" the system, facing both public criticism and loss of actual, deserved benefits.

So carry on, Brits...as long as no-one's seriously flaming anyone else, and you're keeping on-topic, who knows...you might come up with a strategy to benefit the disabled and also address the "fraud and cost" issues! (Well...it's possible, right? :blush: )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really meaning to interrupt this conversation...no, really, I'm not!...but since there seem to be a variety of opinions being expressed here, would it be possible for a few of you folks to give me an idea of just what this entire program (DLA vs. PIP) covers, and for whom? I remember a few other discussions of DLA on here, and as a Yank, it just seems terribly perplexing to me. Lizzie's links seem to presume that the reader is a Brit and knows the history...if there's some "background" out there for a curious Californian, I'd be interested, as it sometimes (often!) seems like you Brits have some creative ways of dealing with disabilities that we in the US don't.

Hi Cheryl wasn’t going to write anymore on this subject but seeing as I been mentioned by name I think I will………where to start .

I basically agree with most that has been written, (bit of a surprise eh!) but if I may I would like to take this slightly further with a bit more background info that you might or might not know.

We in Britain have what’s known as the welfare state, I believe its origins started in earnest at the end of the Second World War. Where a basic frame work was laid down, over the years there have been lots and lots of stuff added to it. (This is very basic) it has been tweaked, altered and basically grown into the system that we enjoy to day.

It basically covers every thing from your birth to your death.

I.e. payments for child benefit , school meals, uniforms , higher education , unemployment , health care , dentist , housing , job seeking basically any benefits the list is endless over the years there has been so much added to it and various layers it would take a very very smart person months just to sit down and go over every thing . It has of course been messed around with by every party that’s came into power and even the most simple benefit has layers upon layers of paperwork and red tape added to it. Making it a very good but very hard system to find you way around. it goes without saying over the years it has grown and grown in its cost to the country and, in the past no political party would seriously try to alter it because of the public outrage so it has grown into something that this country can not afford to keep paying (many will disagree with that statement) but it was deemed political suicide to mess with it.

However that all changed rather suddenly when the banks crashed and the S..T hit the fan , add to the mix a hung parliament where two parties joined together to try to form a government . One of the first things this government set out to do was reduce it outgoing costs targeting amounts many other things the welfare state.

It goes without saying as soon as these cuts where announced all the major players starting getting sorted by lobbying there mp”s fighting there corner to protect there particular benefit, throw into the mix a bit of propaganda (like they are shining examples of humanity) from the press about anyone one benefits is living the high life ect things are looking down.

This now brings us to this thread.

As you have read DLA is made up out of two parts living allowance and mobilility

Each having different levels attached to it. You can get both or either and depending on what level you get depend on the amount of money you get.

I am not going to say anything more about DLA as it is a very difficult subject however I am going to say a few things about the mobility side of this benefit , it is open to and is abused despite what other members say ,

With your say so Cheryl (you can always delete this post) I will go on and say why.

I won’t go into what you need or don’t need to qualify for this (look for yourself via goggle)

But even in my local town , you cant walk down the shopping hall without being accosted by people asking you very direct questions , starting with the have you had an accident in the last few years , as soon as you say yes to any question they will Wisk you away and start the clams process (naturally there is a fee involved but hey you could get lots of money out of this ) they will do all the paperwork , they will also do a benefit check for you and again if there is a slightest chance of any money they will (for a fee) chase the clam up and most importantly do the all important paperwork . And it goes without saying they know exactly what wording to use.

In my circle of friends/workmates ECT there are over ten people using mobility cars, out of that ten I have to be honest and say at least five shouldn’t have them. Now if I know five what’s the % with the rest of the population? Which makes me ask the question are these figures quoted correct, we all know how easy it is to make the figures say what you want them to and believe me any government body is even worse.

Now before anyone jumps one and states that I don’t know these people or there circumstances, I have to say that I do very well.

Some examples I traveled over to the lakes last year twice in a mobility car with the person concerned and climbed up Skiddaw Mountain one week and Blencathra the following week (not bad for a person with mobility problems eh)

Another one plays rugby every week I could go on and on but I have gone off the subject now.

So Basically Cheryl that’s my take on this subject , I don’t have any faith that the new system PIP will be any better when it comes in, it is a cost cutting exercise nothing more nothing less. I also think that people who abuse the system will still abuse it and nothing I write on here will change that .even with my negative attitude towards the benefits.

Not sure how using this forum at work fits in with PIP !

You did ask Cheryl. :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mick, if u know people playing rugby and regularly climbing mountains or whatever with motability cars, perhaps u should be having a word with someone....this is what the public are being asked to do. And even i am questioning how ppl are able take part in activities like these and still qualify for the higher rate of motabiliy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We in Britain have what’s known as the welfare state, I believe its origins started in earnest at the end of the Second World War. Where a basic frame work was laid down, over the years there have been lots and lots of stuff added to it. (This is very basic) it has been tweaked, altered and basically grown into the system that we enjoy to day.

It basically covers every thing from your birth to your death.

You make it sound idyllic, Mick. If you had had need to claim a benefit recently, you would think otherwise!

It is not easy to claim a benefit ... not at all.

DLA, as I said before and as the DWP (Department of Work and Pensions) have stated themselves has a very low fraud rate. If there are people climbing mountains etc, then you need to act upon that and stop berating people who claim DLA on here. Btw are you sure they aren't ex-servicemen? as they can also receive Motability cars ... and they get an enhanced deal compared to civilians, I might add. Ex-servicemen also get a better deal when it comes to prosthetics too ... don't they Mick?

Cheryl ~ the problem with posting these negative comments on this forum is because it makes those of us who claim the benefits feel even more persecuted. Also, government agencies read forums such as these ... we have had minimal representation so far, and these comments do not help.

AND Mick and OBL know how upset Ann and I get about this subject. If you read the beginning of this thread, I posted it for information. I have also asked them to start their own thread ... seeing as they seem to be beeing blokes about it, I'll do it myself ... and start a new thread, just for information and constructive comments.

Not sure how using this forum at work fits in with PIP !

It has everything to do with claiming benefits, Mick.

You have implied that some people who claim DLA are taking money that isn't rightfully theirs. By posting on this, or any other forum, when you are at work and when you do not have your employers approval, you too are stealing ... from your employer. I would also suggest that if someone has enough time to post on here when they are at work, then they do not have enough work to do. I most certainly wouldn't have time to log on, never mind read posts and reply to them, when I am at work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mick, if u know people playing rugby and regularly climbing mountains or whatever with motability cars, perhaps u should be having a word with someone....this is what the public are being asked to do. And even i am questioning how ppl are able take part in activities like these and still qualify for the higher rate of motabiliy.

PM sent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheryl, this article is for you as you asked about the UK perspective:

Benefit cuts are fuelling abuse of disabled people, say charities

Rising public resentment blamed on government focus on alleged 'scrounger' fraud and inflammatory media coverage

The government's focus on alleged fraud and overclaiming to justify cuts in disability benefits has caused an increase in resentment and abuse directed at disabled people, as they find themselves being labelled as scroungers, six of the country's biggest disability groups have warned.

Some of the charities say they are now regularly contacted by people who have been taunted on the street about supposedly faking their disability and are concerned the climate of suspicion could spill over into violence or other hate crimes.

While the charities speaking out – Scope, Mencap, Leonard Cheshire Disability, the National Autistic Society, Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB), and Disability Alliance – say inflammatory media coverage has played a role in this, they primarily blame ministers and civil servants for repeatedly highlighting the supposed mass abuse of the disability benefits system, much of which is unfounded.

At the same time, they say, the focus on "fairness for taxpayers" has fostered the notion that disabled people are a separate group who don't contribute.

Scope's regular polling of people with disabilities shows that in September two-thirds said they had experienced recent hostility or taunts, up from 41% four months before. In the last poll almost half said attitudes towards them had deteriorated in the past year.

Tom Madders, head of campaigns at the National Autistic Society, said: "The Department for Work and Pensions is certainly guilty of helping to drive this media narrative around benefits, portraying those who receive benefits as workshy scroungers or abusing a system that's really easy to cheat."

He added that ministers such as the work and pensions secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, were being "deeply irresponsible" in conflating Disability Living Allowance (DLA), which helps disabled people hold down jobs, and Employment and Support Allowance (ESA), a payment for those unable to work. This "scrounger rhetoric" was already having an impact on people's lives, Madders said, citing a woman who rang the charity to say a neighbour who formerly gave lifts to her autistic child had stopped doing so following press articles about disabled people receiving free cars under a government scheme.

Some disabled people say the climate is so hostile they avoid going out, or avoid using facilities such as designated parking bays if they "don't look disabled".

The government has committed to making significant cuts to disability benefits, including a 20% reduction in the DLA bill by 2015/16. Much of its public focus has been on alleged fraudulent claims or cutting benefits to those whose conditions have improved.

Charities point to a series of ministerial statements arguing that the "vast majority" of new ESA claimants are able to work, while the disabilities minister, Maria Miller, said last month that £600m of DLA was overpaid each year, not mentioning that a greater sum is saved by others not receiving what they are due.

This is "playing directly into a media narrative about the need to weed out scroungers," said Richard Hawkes, chief executive of Scope. "Our polling shows that this narrative has coincided with attitudes towards disabled people getting worse.

"Disabled people tell us that increasingly people don't believe that they are disabled and suddenly feel empowered to question their entitlement to support."

David Congdon, head of policy at Mencap, said the charity feared where this could lead. "We are concerned that this narrative of benefit scroungers or fakers connected to the welfare reform bill does risk stigmatising all people with a disability," he said. "The worry would be that this could lead to an increase in resentment against disabled people, and even an increase in hate crimes."

There was "an incredibly strong focus on benefit fraud within the DWP", said Guy Parckar, policy manager for Leonard Cheshire. "It is mentioned at all possible opportunities. Of course, whenever there is fraud you want that to be tackled, but there should be some serious thought given to the long-term impact that this has. There is the impact of potential hate crime, and issues around that."

Neil Coyle, head of policy for Disability Alliance, said his organisation was being told of increasing levels of verbal abuse, and worried this could lead to attacks.

"There's a lot of concern that the level of abuse and harassment goes unrecorded because it's seen almost as a norm. It seems to be growing as a result of a mis-perception of much more widespread abuse of benefits than actually exists. That's being fed by the DWP in their attempts to justify massive reductions in welfare expenditure."

A DWP spokeswoman said the department was committed to supporting disabled people but needed to "do more to change negative attitudes", and had begun a cross-government consultation on tackling discrimination.

She said: "Our welfare reforms are designed to restore integrity into the benefits system and to ensure that everyone who needs help and support receives it."

David Gillon from Chatham in Kent, said: "I think we've lost all the progress we made in the last 30 years in terms of acceptance." Gillon, whose chronic back condition forced him to give up a job with British Aerospace, recounts walking on crutches past a pub in the middle of the day and receiving shouts of: "We're going to report you to the DWP." He said: "When there's a bad article in the press, the next day you think, 'Do I really need to go out of the house?' We're being forced back into the attic, locked away from society."

Fazilet Hadi, head of inclusion for the RNIB, said she also felt the tone was set by ministers: "I think they should be more careful. At the moment it feels like the government is not on the side of disabled people. Most people don't have that much exposure to disabled people. They don't see us in the lifestyle pages, they don't see us in the fashion pages. The only reference they see is in these stories. And that's why the language is so important."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the additional info, Lizzie. It reminds me of the various groups that have been "scapegoated" here in response to these tight financial times.

It's my personal opinion that, if there is a benefit out there, there will be someone who is going to try and fraudulently claim it. However, to use that as a reason to cut benefits to people who truly do qualify strikes me as equally dishonest. Recently, here in the States, there has been a backlash against public employee pensions which has been whipped to a frenzy with reports of folks who have, indeed, manipulated the pension system to their own personal gain. This completely ignores the overwhelming masses of public employees who have given decades of service, contributed generously to their pension funds, and retired after 30+ years with very modest pensions indeed.

I really hate to think of people with genuine disabilities being falsely accused of defrauding a system designed to allow them to better function in "normal" society...I also hate to think of people who should not benefit "milking" that system for their own illicit gain. It's a difficult issue, that's for sure, and I hope our member Brits manage not to be caught in the crossfire.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Cheryl.

I agree that there will always be 'professional' benefit claimants. However, DLA has a very low rate of fraud - the lowest apart from the state pension.

When all is said and done, the people who got us into this mess have been the various govenments over several decades (who allowed a relaxation of financial regulation) and bankers (who gambled with peoples', companies' and governments' money). But, we don't see them suffering, do we?

I suppose it's very easy to target 'the disabled'? as Tanni Grey Thompson states in this video.

If there have to be austerity measures they should be from the top down, not the bottom up. And, everyone should lose the same amount of income proportionally ... only then will we 'all be in it together'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mick - if you have resort to sarcasm, when talking about such a serious subject, then you're being very insulting to those of us who do deserve the benefit.

I really do put a vast amount of effort into having an opinion without trying to upset anyone...

Then, seeing as you know from past postings on DLA that many of us do not agree with you, why have you replied?

Also, unless you are a health professional who has assessed someone in receipt of DLA, you are not qualified to give an opinion on their claim. They may, for example, have a hidden disability ... and it may be the only day they've been mobile in a month.

This is a public forum and this thread is about PIP ... if you want to argue the point then create your own thread.

... there is no evidence that 'many of us do not agree with you'... and I don't need to justify why I replied, this is a forum... I have not directed any personal comments toward anyone... your comments about me 'pontificating' and 'being a bloke' are offensive, fortunately I'm kind natured and haven't taken them seriously. I will not get stuck into a personal slanging match with you or anyone else. Be assured, I will give my opinion when I choose, I am satisfied I have done nothing to warrant your responses. You do not respect any opinion unless it coincides with yours it seems to me.

Good luck with your campaigning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×