Budget - tougher for DLA claimants

karatedragon

burkey365 wrote: »

karatedragon...substantial is a word open to interpretation

As are all claims for DLA. All claims are specific to each applicants needs as defined in caselaw.

Disabilities cover a multitude of conditions. Mental Health problems being one example.

You seem to think DLA is simply for those that have to suck through a straw all day.

It is to provide help with Care and Mobility needs. If this financial help means you can work as a result then that can only be good.

DLA is not some form of "unemployment sick benefit". This is a misconception many make.

If your disability is such that you have these needs then you are entitled to the level commensurate with your situation.

SUMMER

BLT wrote: »

I still say you lost my sympathy when you said DLA was useful for takeaways when you couldn't be bothered to cook, clearly you can be bothered to get up and go to the fish and chip shop, is that a lot easier than cooking?

I fail to see why the taxpayer is funding people who are depressed, enabling them to stay in bed all day or ring up to order takeaways, surely the best cure would be to get out of bed and actually do something, not just lay there feeling sorry for themselves.

I have been depressed, I went for long walks and exercised. Perhaps I should have applied for free trainers and sports kit

Sarcastic git !!

burkey365

why should i go away i am a taxpayer whose brother lost his arms and legs in iraq he receives dla, i aqm voicing an opinion to people on here who say its unfair that they should have medicals and yet most of these people like sh1305 suffer a depression..if you are genuine you will pass the medical, FACT so stop worrying though i still cant get my head around how people can claim it when they say on here i cant be bothered to cook, or i run away...wheres that a disability...karatedragon..thats what i have been saying they will sort it all out at the medical and hopefully redefine the benefit

annies_mum

woody01 wrote: »

My daughter gets DLA aswell!
Although.......
I wonder how many of you moaning here voted Tory?

Most if not all......make your bed and lie in it

too true, trouble even those of us that didn't vote tory are having to lie in the same bed

seven-day-weekend

Although on the whole I agree with people having medicals, my son'sgirlfriend who has Aspergers's Syndrome and gets low rate mobility and care DLA, will not be able to properly explain to the Dr how her condition affects her daily . Being unable to explain herself clearly is actually a symptom of her condition. Presumably she would be able to take someone with her to speak on her behalf?

karatedragon

Well I know my friend is spending her DLA on her care needs.

She pays for a care visit in the evenings each day of the week and also wears a Vulnerable Person's GPS tag which she pays £35 a month for. She can press a button anywhere and summon help and can be found.

These care expenses make her life better. I would rather her get DLA and work 4 hours a day and get supervison at work - which in effect is constant as there is always someone around - than be on ESA and DLA sat at home probably feeling worse.

I am guessing that somone on DLA having an adapted car to get to work is also wrong.

Indie_Kid

burkey365 wrote: »

if you are genuine you will pass the medical

It's not as simple as that:
I inherited a rare genetic disease from one of my parents and as a result, have another rare condition. It took me a year to convince the DM that having sight problems which are severe enough for me to be refused a driving licence on medical grounds, do affect my ability to read.

ellie43

I cannot agree with the comments along the lines that if you have a genuine disability you have nothing to worry about. I only hope (a vain hope I suspect) that ATOS will not be involved. There is currently a very high rate of successful appeals against ATOS assessments for ESA which suggests something is very wrong with what ATOS are doing.

A recent BBC Scotland programme highlighted this with an ATOS doctor admitting that the main target, as far as ATOS are concerned, is the percentage of claimants that are assessed as fit for work. The doctor said that she was told she was assessing too many claimants as unfit for work. It would appear therefore that ATOS have a financial incentive to assess claimants as fit for work whether they are or not. The full details of the contract that the govt has with ATOS has not been disclosed despite a FOI request by a MP.

A case was highlighted on the programme where a lady who worked for the DWP, became unwell with ME was assessed by ATOS as unfit for work and likely to remain so. As a result of this assessment this lady was dismissed from her job with the DWP. Three weeks later the lady applied for ESA and was again assessed by ATOS. In this assessment she was assessed as fit for work!

She then went to a tribunal and was assessed by the tribunal as unfit for work. What worries me about this is the vulnerable people who fall through the cracks and are not well enough to deal with the the appeals/tribunal process. Also of course the wasted money in getting the first decision wrong.

There has been another case recently where the ATOS doctor failed to notice the claimant had only one leg.

Sometimes ATOS use nurses and not doctors to assess claimants. I can see problems arising with 'hidden' disabilities such as mental health and ME. It took me over 4 years to get a diagnosis of ME because of lack of awareness amongst healthcare professionals. I have no faith at all that ATOS doctors and nurses will be any better informed. Because of the limitations within the NHS, claimants may well not have access to knowledgeable healthcare professionals to support them to claim the benefits to which they are entitled.

If you would like to read some more info about the awful time some people have with ATOS go to the Benefits and Work website (its currently down, probably getting lots of hits due to the budget).

I suspect what will happen is that the introduction of medicals will be used to make the criteria for claiming DLA more strict and so save money. This is what has happened with the the changeover from IB to ESA. If is this is the case then the govt should be honest about it instead of trying to use a smokescreen of targeting benefit cheats.

It is notable that DWP initiatives to reduce fraud in DLA claims has had very little success, simply because it would appear that fraud levels are actually very low (despite what the media would have you believe). DLA is not an easy benefit to claim, it always takes me months to fill out the form as it is so long and the responses need to be so detailed.

There is nothing I would like more than to be well enough to work and not need to claim benefits. Prior to my illness I always worked and supported myself. It is very unpleasant to be lumped together in a category of welfare scroungers, often with no mention of genuine claimants.

burkey365

people cant concentrate on work and care for your friend at the same time...its just not possible...what work does she do

karatedragon

burkey365 wrote: »

people cant concentrate on work and care for your friend at the same time...its just not possible...what work does she do

The workplace were fully aware of her condition and as part of their "reasonable adaptations" under the DDA people being aware of her having an issue is part of this. As is her boss checking on her. Not every five seconds obviously but periodically.

If they were not prepared to make these adapations then they would not have offered her the job.

She works in a specialist Library.