Budget - tougher for DLA claimants

cyclonebri1

_shel wrote: »

Exactly, I've had several medicals for DLA over the years, though not every time. The only difference is that it will now be compulsary for every claim or reclaim!

Only if aged under 65;)

easy

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Then you have no understanding of what I said. I accept that it is perfectly fair to expect a person to take a medical for medically based benefits.

My issue is that I don't want to know about it 3 years in advance,:eek:, if you were chosen for one under the present system you would take it within weeks surely you can see the difference??

I don't see that it makes any difference. One day, I may be re-assessed for my DLA. It doesn't make any difference when that will be, until I actually get a letter giving me a date, I won't give it a minutes thought, because I am getting on with living my life now.

And I won't worry about it when I do get an appointment, because I qualify for the benefit I receive.

cyclonebri1

Lady_K wrote: »

George Osborne claimed that plans to reform DLA would "ensure support is targeted on those with the highest medical need," and that payments would only be made "for as long as a claimant needs them."

There was some mention before the budget that welfare benefits might be on 2 levels so the comment 'targeted on those with the highest need' makes me wonder if the reforming of dla may mean it will be for such people who are at present in need of high rate care and mobility providing they pass the medical and the rest might be either taken off altogether or go onto ESA

This has been said in several posts so far. Many folks like me have had to retire from work early due to accidents and degenerative conditions. In doing this we have suffered reduced pensions and are not in a position to seek re-employment.

I personally had to retire from a senior position with a company I had worked for for 38 years, at thge age of 55. My income is now 1/4 of what it was then and DLA probably makes up about 25% of that. I can asure you that my case was not by choice. The amount of IB I recieve is also reduced by about 75% due to the fact I recieve some pension income.

I'm afraid there isn't a one approach suits all answer to the problem ;)

deeplyblue

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

For me it's nothing to do with saving money and everything to do with providing disabled people with the help they need. In many cases, I would expect people to get far more support than they do at present. This really isn't about "benefit bashing" although it's obviously easier to call it that than to engage in rational debate.

A quick look at the budget shows that the government is expecting this measure to save money - there are even figures attached. (If you want them - try googling budget uk and "Disability Living Allowance")

What a number of us believe is that it also a measure designed to appease certain portions of the Tory press. "Look, we may be putting up VAT and all sorts of other nasty things - some of which we haven't told you about yet - but at least we're getting tough on all these fake-disabled benefit-scrounging scum." A quick look at the Daily Mail will show you how popular a target those thought to be faking disability claims are.

I detect a zombified version of the Benefits Integrity Programme (BIP) which disfigured the last months of the Major government. This too was about "making sure that only those entitled ..." - according to the handouts. In that particular case, it was a crude piece of electioneering sold to the government by a bunch of civil servants who saw a period of low scrutiny by politicians with other things on their minds. The civil servants wanted to create a new little empire of benefit-busters, which would be well-established by the time the new lot were settled in.

It didn't work. Eventually BIP went away, as the new government had no use for it, and anyway it was costing more than it saved.

I sympathise with those who feel that disability benefits are under attack in the long term, and afraid that their already shaky financial position may be get even worse. I also think there is some merit in the comment that the real bite in this measure is not scheduled until 2013 or later, and that we will need to see how things pan out.

Long term though? We are an ageing society, and not getting any healthier. The whole social welfare system is going to be under attack. If you don't really need any penny now, then perhaps you should invest your DLA against that day. I hear there are some banking stocks going cheap.

db

cyclonebri1

easy wrote: »

I don't see that it makes any difference. One day, I may be re-assessed for my DLA. It doesn't make any difference when that will be, until I actually get a letter giving me a date, I won't give it a minutes thought, because I am getting on with living my life now.

And I won't worry about it when I do get an appointment, because I qualify for the benefit I receive.

Effectively the letter has been sent that's the point. The fear from my point of view is not whether I deserve it or not, it's if it will be carried out with adequate input from both the claimant and any medical proffessional that have dealt with these issues over a longer period of time other than a 2o min interview by some ATOS "doctor" who by the very fact that they are working for ATOS are not likely to be at the top of their game. Consider what we hear about the nunmber of appeals that are reversed in favour of the claimant. Suggests to me that ATOS will automatically fail some genuine cases on the asumption that they will not be able to put together an effective appeal.

I think we agree and I'm sure any genuine cases would that it would be fairer and even more effective in terms of cost cutting to action the system now. Yes I know it cannot be instantaneous but 3 years :rotfl:

easy

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Effectively the letter has been sent that's the point. The fear from my point of view is not whether I deserve it or not, it's if it will be carried out with adequate input from both the claimant and any medical proffessional that have dealt with these issues over a longer period of time other than a 2o min interview by some ATOS "doctor" who by the very fact that they are working for ATOS are not likely to be at the top of their game. Consider what we hear about the nunmber of appeals that are reversed in favour of the claimant. Suggests to me that ATOS will automatically fail some genuine cases on the asumption that they will not be able to put together an effective appeal.

I think we agree and I'm sure any genuine cases would that it would be fairer and even more effective in terms of cost cutting to action the system now. Yes I know it cannot be instantaneous but 3 years :rotfl:

No, the letter hasn't been sent !!!.

4 million things could happen between now and 3 years time, including (but not limited to) another change of govt (which is possible), a reversal of this idea if they cost it out, the total collapse of the western world economies which would mean no benefits to anyone, you win the lottery so don't rely on DLA anymore etc etc etc etc.

I'm sorry, but I honestly feel that if you can get soooo worked up about something which won't actually affect you for at least the next 3 years (cos it'll take them a long time to process thru all umpty thousand current claimants), then you must have a very carefree day-to-day existence.

jimbms

easy wrote: »

.............................
4 million things could happen between now and 3 years time, including ........................ the total collapse of the western world economies which would mean no benefits to anyone......................

I give this option the best chance of happening.

Indie_Kid

_shel wrote: »

But it appears you are working on the assumption that everyone with a disability 'cant be bothered to cook' and takes advantage of the fact they have extra income to spoil themselves with takaways.

Exactly. I don't have extra income left after spending my DLA on things I need. Sometimes, the things I need (such as getting new glasses every year) costs more than the DLA and I have to use my own money.

Many people, myself included, would at times put themselves, their family and their neigbours in danger of serious injury or death if they cooked a meal.

Exactly. It's not unusual for me to burn myself or the food when cooking.

You think the people on the bus would be so kind. No, they would not. I have been robbed during a seizure nobody much cared and nobody was caught. And once went round a bus route 3 times before the driver noticed I was unconscious on his bus! Even then I just got threw off in depot, left to find my way home with no money quite late at night.

This is disguting.

cyclonebri1

easy wrote: »

No, the letter hasn't been sent !!!.

4 million things could happen between now and 3 years time, including (but not limited to) another change of govt (which is possible), a reversal of this idea if they cost it out, the total collapse of the western world economies which would mean no benefits to anyone, you win the lottery so don't rely on DLA anymore etc etc etc etc.

I'm sorry, but I honestly feel that if you can get soooo worked up about something which won't actually affect you for at least the next 3 years (cos it'll take them a long time to process thru all umpty thousand current claimants), then you must have a very carefree day-to-day existence.

God you are a head case. The letter has been sent. Everything you have said I have said before you. Unfortunately some people will now get wound up uneccessarily about this, read what you said in your previous post, not quoting but something along the lines of "I will worry when I know when the medical is"

Already said that

Already said that too

Ju7esss what do you mean by that?
If you mean that because of my disability everthing is hunky dory, then you are wrong.

If you think that the threat of a reduction of DLA is not a major concern you are wrong

If you don't accept I agreed with you in the last post I take it back, you are wrong.

If you mean by that, do your problems mean that you cannot get on with a normal life and have more time to sit around worrying, then yes, you are right.

Unfortunately your overall view doesn't stack up. Or do you want an argument rather than just state a few views, I didn't refer to you, please respond similarly.:p

krisskross

sh1305 wrote: »

Exactly. I don't have extra income left after spending my DLA on things I need. Sometimes, the things I need (such as getting new glasses every year) costs more than the DLA and I have to use my own money.

I have to pay for my glasses with my own money, shock horror. I also need new ones each year as I have a degenerative eye problem. Cost is usually about £350.

I suggest you use some of that £7K you have managed to save in a year or so.