UK: Disability benefits (UC, ESA and PIP) - news and updates 2024 and 2025

JemPD said:
my bolding

So you didnt have to start a new claim? It was just the old previous claim continuing but it had to be re-entered into the system by hand?

I ask because my claim is old and long, and because its the old fashioned legacy version of ESA its contribution based & not subject to transfer to UC. My fear is that if my own claim gets 'too big' that this may happen to me & instead of the claim being continuous they may start again from scratch with a new claim? Which would have new rules that are hugely problematic for me.
Click to expand...

@JemPD, I'm sorry, I haven't been online and only just saw your post. I don't want to leave you worrying. No, it's not about a starting a new claim (although that was my fear). The person on the phone said several times that they were sorry and that I'd done nothing wrong.

Unfortunately, this may happen to you or others on the forum. I'm on the same type of ESA as you are and have been on it and its predecessors for decades. As I understand it everything should be as before, although I'm worried that there might be additional fall-out or that it's brought me to their attention.

I'm wondering if I should write to John Pring about it.
 
Please remove this if it breaches the rules on political content.

I've just seen MPs, including the Chancellor, on TV talking about taking part in the London Marathon. They are all raising money for health/disability charities.

To be honest it makes me feel sick, since many of them have instigated and voted for policies that deny sick and disabled people the basics for life, and expressed hate against us. But a jolly day out for CHARIDEE makes it alright.
 
For info, here are the consultation questions:

Chapter 1 – Consultation questions
Q1. What are your views on an assessment that places more emphasis on condition rather than the functional impact of a condition on the person?

Q2. What are your views on people receiving PIP without an assessment if they have specific health conditions or a disability as evidenced by a healthcare professional?

Q3. What are your views on PIP claimants not being subject to an award review if they have a specific health condition or disability as evidenced by a healthcare professional?

Q4. Do you agree or disagree on making provision of evidence or a formal diagnosis by a medical expert a mandatory requirement for eligibility for PIP?
  • Agree
  • Disagree
  • Don’t know
Q5. In relation to Question 4, please explain your answer and provide evidence or your opinion to support further development of our approach.

Q6. How could we prevent the provision of evidence or a formal diagnosis by a medical expert from impacting the NHS? Please explain your answer and provide evidence or your opinion to support further development of our approach.

Q7. Do you agree or disagree that eligibility for PIP should be based more on condition?
  • Agree
  • Disagree
  • Don’t know
Q8. How could we determine eligibility for the following conditions?
  • Conditions that fluctuate
  • Conditions that vary in severity
  • Conditions that might be cured or have access to better/new/novel treatments over time.
Please explain your answer and provide evidence or your opinion to support further development in our approach.
Click to expand...
 
Kitty said:
For info, here are the consultation questions:
Click to expand...

That's really helpful. Thanks @Kitty

I am planning to write a response, but have a serious lack of capacity, and it feels totally pointless after the WCA Consultation, which they published their response to 23 days after it closed - which I broke myself trying to respond to along with the DHSC consultation and the disability action plan all running concurrently last year.
 
JellyBabyKid said:
it feels totally pointless after the WCA Consultation
Click to expand...

There's a chance it'd be a pointless exercise this time, as there may be a change of government in the not-too-distant. There's likely to be some focus on this even if the current opposition gets voted in, but all bets are off on what it will look like and when it will happen.

As for the current government, I think it's likely to be as much a political exercise as anything, along with other recent announcements.
 
Kitty said:
There's a chance it'd be a pointless exercise this time,.... I think it's likely to be as much a political exercise as anything, along with other recent announcements.
Click to expand...

I agree, but I can't stand by and do nothing, as the stress this causes is overwhelming, and at least I will have put my comments in writing for future reference purposes - mostly mine.
 
Kitty said:
For info, here are the consultation questions:
Click to expand...

I'm just so confused now. There's been so many consultations. This seems more about the Severe Disability Group, not about the announcements/threats over the last few days.

And why do we have to provide evidence when none of this is based on evidence. I used to work with government publications and whatever the substance at least they followed a linear process - announcement in the Queen's Speech, Green Paper, consultation process, Select Committee report, White Paper before legislation was drawn up. There had to be statistics and projections, not just stuff made up on the spot. For major legislation the process would take several years. Now it's all over the place.

Responding to these consultations has caused a decline in my health, and it's not made a blind bit of difference. It's just got worse and worse. After all if they don't care what the UN says, why should they listen to us.
 
Merged thread

I am really worried about the new proposed changes to PIP. I have a big worry that even if an election is close, that these changes will still go through with a new govt. After all, the opposition party have also in recent months said “there is no option of a life on benefits” and that they are “the party of work”. I feel a niggling worry that the shadow cabinet (if they become the new govt) would carry on with these ideas and put them into practice.

For this reason I feel it’s something I should be taking seriously?

The govt are saying that the PIP cost to the public is too much. They are talking about vouchers instead of cash payments. Having tiers of funding so that your GP has to certify how severe your condition is and how much funding you need every month for expenses related to your disability and health condition. One-off payments for aids and adaptations instead of ongoing payments. And I also think this rhetoric is feeding into society and more people will vilify and hate disabled and sick people. There’s so much there, I really worry that this is the start of a really downhill road.

Is anyone else worried like me? PIP is a lifeline for our family.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m not worrying too much yet, I don’t think there will be the draconian sweeping changes that they’ve mooted even if the Tories stay in power.
In the meantime I’ll be gathering as much medical evidence as I can and trying to build a little cushion of savings.
This kind of “prep” helps me feel a bit more in control, as let’s face it my PIP or LCWRA could be reviewed or changed at short notice anyway and I need to be ready.
 
tornandfrayed said:
This seems more about the Severe Disability Group, not about the announcements/threats over the last few days.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it is, TBH. Quite a lot of it seems to be more about them imagining that people housebound with anxiety and depression are a bit fed up, and that putting in a couple of grab handles and a raised loo seat will cover all the additional costs of people with mobility problems.

Basing awards on a named condition instead of how it affects people is a new approach, but anyone looking at how it would work in practice will see it's unfeasible. For one thing, it'd still be based on how the conditions affect people—almost everyone over a certain age has osteoarthritis, for instance, but it only causes significant disability in a minority of them. For another, it could theoretically lead to people getting higher awards, since a good proportion of claimants will have several conditions.

The whole thing looks so rushed and ill-thought out that I'm not going waste time on it. The disability organisations will have to, and what they say might be important—if a different party is elected at the next GE, it could possibly form part of an exercise in reviewing PIP. But they'd probably have a completely different set of questions anyway, so as an individual, I'll wait for them.
 
Another Guardian article about the proposed changes, this time from a psychologist:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/may/01/rishi-sunak-welfare-support-depression-anxiety

When does crude electioneering become a threat to public health? Rishi Sunak’s and Mel Stride’s relentless attack on disabled people, with a specific targeting of mental health claimants, will have damaging and potentially deadly consequences. Those of us working in acute psychiatric wards and community services can attest to the severe impact their suggestion of stopping disability benefits would have, and the pain caused by the callous manner in which they have delegitimised mental anguish.
Click to expand...
 
Others will probably have actual experience of this and maybe I’m wrong but the proposal around changing to vouchers to help with adaptations doesn’t appear in any event to be something new because the Disabled Facilities Grant already exists. Albeit that you have to apply to your local council for this and it’s no doubt very difficult to get. So using something already available,if not in exactly the same way, as some kind of new approach is disingenuous to say the least.
 
NelliePledge said:
the proposal around changing to vouchers to help with adaptations doesn’t appear in any event to be something new because the Disabled Facilities Grant already exists
Click to expand...

It does, and I suspect the ideas was try and take people off PIP because "support already exists". Except that it doesn't, DFGs are quite specific and don't cover ongoing costs. Same goes for the small aids that people get via their local authority.

NelliePledge said:
Albeit that you have to apply to your local council for this and it’s no doubt very difficult to get.
Click to expand...

I think it may depend on the council's attitude.

DFG is fully funded by central government, and councils even get an additional grant to reimburse the costs of their staff processing applications and project-managing installations. It was explained to me by the officer who handled mine.

Our council took the view that if adaptations were justified they should be done, not least because it's always possible that good, impactful funding schemes could be withdrawn in future. This is why I applied for the replacement of my wheelchair ramp, and ended up with a stairlift and wet room as well! I hadn't asked for them because I didn't want to be greedy, but they took a more pragmatic view—I had a history of falls, there was no question I needed them, and why not get them done now whilst the funding's available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom