Who's going to loose when DLA becomes PIP?

schrodie

uponahill wrote: »

No, but it is proposed already to extend the period whilst waiting to see if your appeal is even accepted.

Consequently and hopefully making it more difficult both time wise and financially to appeal.

You would have to have very secure grounds to appeal and have sufficient income from other sources to live off!!

Officially the reason is to give the DM time to collect or request more pertinent information regarding your claim to see if a reconsideration of the original decision is valid. The problem is that there is [currently] no time limit laid down on how long this process should take so theoretically the DWP could take "a very long time" to reconsider your original decision.

Of course this is not to make the process any more efficient it's to hopefully p*** the claimant off so much that they end up dropping their claim.

pauletruth

great if i lose my motaility car i am housebound. how that helps save money i don't understand as it will mean i will need to start claiming benifits. how many disabled are going to lose their jobs because of this.

moose1982

pauletruth wrote: »

great if i lose my motaility car i am housebound. how that helps save money i don't understand as it will mean i will need to start claiming benifits. how many disabled are going to lose their jobs because of this.

This is a situation which is something I hope someone can clear up. If someone, like paulethruth, had to resign because of an inability to get to work (job location is not served by public transport for example), would the 'up to 26 week' sanction be considered for JSA? I think it would be unfair if that happened.

HB58

schrodie wrote: »

Officially the reason is to give the DM time to collect or request more pertinent information regarding your claim to see if a reconsideration of the original decision is valid. The problem is that there is [currently] no time limit laid down on how long this process should take so theoretically the DWP could take "a very long time" to reconsider your original decision.

Of course this is not to make the process any more efficient it's to hopefully p*** the claimant off so much that they end up dropping their claim.

...and tomorrow the Lords will debate the bill to withdraw legal aid for appeals against welfare benefit decisions...

rogerblack

uponahill wrote: »

Are you being serious?

We are being told day in day out by the PM that IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN! He is on record saying that despite what the public say and indeed what the House of Lords says, he will not deviate.

I think you are referring to the welfare reform bill.
This is not the same thing as was being discussed above.
The welfare reform bill clearly will pass.

PIP thresholds and rules are still under consultation.
The criteria have changed considerably since the first round of consultation.

Is PIP going ahead - and will it affect many - almost certainly.

Can we by submitting reasoned arguments why some descriptors are manifestly unfair and do not achieve the aims set out cause change - perhaps.

Abandoning all hope is the worst thing to do.

uponahill

schrodie wrote: »

Officially the reason is to give the DM time to collect or request more pertinent information regarding your claim to see if a reconsideration of the original decision is valid. The problem is that there is [currently] no time limit laid down on how long this process should take so theoretically the DWP could take "a very long time" to reconsider your original decision.

Of course this is not to make the process any more efficient it's to hopefully p*** the claimant off so much that they end up dropping their claim.

Correct and I must admit a damn good but of creative planning!!

No official appeal in force - no money!!

Obviously for ESA, most would then have to claim JSA and look for a job and give up on the appeal.

For PIP, whilst the money side won't affect anybody, the waiting time that can be imposed will create stress making people give up!

uponahill

pauletruth wrote: »

great if i lose my motaility car i am housebound. how that helps save money i don't understand as it will mean i will need to start claiming benifits. how many disabled are going to lose their jobs because of this.

I don't understand your point.

Loss of car = doesn't save the government money - as you would have to start claiming benefits????


What are you on about?

Why would all of that happen?

Go out and buy a damn car and carry on working to pay for it and you won't need to claim anymore benefits!

The logic of some people.

uponahill

moose1982 wrote: »

This is a situation which is something I hope someone can clear up. If someone, like paulethruth, had to resign because of an inability to get to work (job location is not served by public transport for example), would the 'up to 26 week' sanction be considered for JSA? I think it would be unfair if that happened.

Why do you ask??

Go and buy your own car is the simple answer.

uponahill

HB58 wrote: »

...and tomorrow the Lords will debate the bill to withdraw legal aid for appeals against welfare benefit decisions...

And so they should!!!

Giving people money to fight the government so that they can get more money off the government!!

uponahill

rogerblack wrote: »

I think you are referring to the welfare reform bill.
This is not the same thing as was being discussed above.
The welfare reform bill clearly will pass.

PIP thresholds and rules are still under consultation.
The criteria have changed considerably since the first round of consultation.

Is PIP going ahead - and will it affect many - almost certainly.

Can we by submitting reasoned arguments why some descriptors are manifestly unfair and do not achieve the aims set out cause change - perhaps.

Abandoning all hope is the worst thing to do.

Thanks

Well from my point of view I honestly don't care what they do. They will do what they will do in the end.

And I have more important things to do than fighting a lost cause.