motability/payments

L6MCT

uponahill wrote: »

Good, at last they are getting off their westminster backsides and doing something about the abuse, fraud and error involved with DLA.

Those that have been on it the longest without regular reviews need to be the first!

Shame that they aren't working harder and faster in bringing in UC!

DLA - R.I.P.!!

By the Governments own figures the fraud rate for DLA is 0.5% the DWP error accounts for 0.8% . There are also more underpayments than overpayments

DLA is already the hardest benefit to get. In spite of what the Red Top tabloid media would have you believe, DLA's classed as an "in work" benefit and has helped a lot of disabled people to stay in work or to get work.

In fact even Government ministers have been known to get muddled between DLA & ESA during debates in Parliament. DLA isn't means tested and even David Cameron, a millionaire, claimed DLA during his son Ivan's lifetime. Children under 16 and those over 64 won't be assessed for PIP and will continue to receive DLA.

PIP will also be an "in work" non means tested benefit.

uponahill

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

its not that simple, claim, gp backs you up and
badabing you got it. my GP supported me, i seen the report he gave,
but was minimal as he dont do home visits and i rarely seen him
because i was under specialist consunltant so he was none the wiser to my
needs at home or out. QUOTE]

And thereby is the reason!!!

The GP must give a full and complete report to the DWP!!

My GP said - His mobility is poor to none - He requires constant daily care from his wife - He is not able to make the simplest of decisions.

My consultant refused to comment and told the DWP that he was too busy looking after sick patients!!!

uponahill

Anubis wrote: »

For disabilities that are "invisible" to the eye it tends to be very difficult to get, especially nowadays. I was "unofficially" informed from an official in the "know" that the main targets they want to remove from PIP are those with the "can't walk because if my bad back" type.

However it was "unofficial" and said to my friend at our house who had one leg amputated after several years of suffering with it. He was wondering how he would get on as he had a trial PIP form, and that was the response he got.

You mean from DLA.

Yes the can't walk, won't walk brigade!!

Bad back? I didn't even mention that and a few other problems on my DLA & ESA applications. The ones I did mention were enough to be getting on with!!

Yes the bad back and the ability to hump furniture around for a living.

I could name a few other 'conditions' that are subjective and all seem to fit in the category of 'unprovable - so they must exist'!

uponahill

L6MCT wrote: »

By the Governments own figures the fraud rate for DLA is 0.5% the DWP error accounts for 0.8% . There are also more underpayments than overpayments

DLA is already the hardest benefit to get. In spite of what the Red Top tabloid media would have you believe, DLA's classed as an "in work" benefit and has helped a lot of disabled people to stay in work or to get work.

Would be please explain how doshing out say £50 a week for MRC or HRM helps people stay in work or get work?

Surely that level of money can't make the difference between being able to work or not!
If in fact it can, and I am wrong, then surely if they are working they will be earning at least £50 for themselves and wouldn't then need the £50 off DLA!!

Very confusing.

In fact even Government ministers have been known to get muddled between DLA & ESA during debates in Parliament. DLA isn't means tested and even David Cameron, a millionaire, claimed DLA during his son Ivan's lifetime. Children under 16 and those over 64 won't be assessed for PIP and will continue to receive DLA.

PIP will also be an "in work" non means tested benefit.

So you will agree that doshing out money - say £100 a week for MRC & HRM,, does fit in with being able to work 40 hours a week in a normally demanding job?

I have still yet to be convinced that any amount of money from DLA helps someone in work. Maybe you can explain how it does?

I can fully understand the reasons for DLA whilst being unemployable, but cannot for the life of me see the connection with money being given so that they can earn their own money.
Surely working and earning means that they can be self sufficient.
You could say that they need it for a Motability car or for carers or for whatever, but if you are earning your own money how on earth does the extra become so important? Buy your own car, pay for acrers etc out of income that you earn.

Surely PIP should only be given to those that are unemployable due to a disability or at the best can only do a few hours of light work. Why would would someone who works 40 hrs a week need it?
The mind boggles!!

Anubis_2

uponahill wrote: »

You mean from DLA.

Yes the can't walk, won't walk brigade!!

Bad back? I didn't even mention that and a few other problems on my DLA & ESA applications. The ones I did mention were enough to be getting on with!!

Yes the bad back and the ability to hump furniture around for a living.

I could name a few other 'conditions' that are subjective and all seem to fit in the category of 'unprovable - so they must exist'!

No from PIP. I probably didn't explain it well enough, he got a trial PIP form and came to our house and someone who is in the know was there. He asked the person if he thinks PIP would affect him, and the person said that PIP is about getting rid of the bad back types.

moose1982

uponahill wrote: »

I can fully understand the reasons for DLA whilst being unemployable, but cannot for the life of me see the connection with money being given so that they can earn their own money.
Surely working and earning means that they can be self sufficient.
You could say that they need it for a Motability car or for carers or for whatever, but if you are earning your own money how on earth does the extra become so important? Buy your own car, pay for acrers etc out of income that you earn.

Surely PIP should only be given to those that are unemployable due to a disability or at the best can only do a few hours of light work. Why would would someone who works 40 hrs a week need it?
The mind boggles!!

Because Andy, DLA is meant to be a universal benefit to assist people with the extra expenses which a disabled person incurs. There are people who are working fulltime and really struggling, with the added bonus of not having any disability.

If a working disabled person had to get a car to get them to and from work, they may need to have it adapted. I have basic hand controls in a Ford Focus, the installers told me that if I had done it privately, I would have a bill for about £1500.

If a working disabled person needed a carer, chances are they would need to approach an agency. That agency would need to pay minimum wage (£6.08 p/h) plus their cut on top, so maybe £10 p/h with an agency? How many hours could that person then afford with things which could end up seriously hurting them (think maybe cutting veg up for dinner with a sharp knife)?

Why do you hate people so much? Why haven't the mods banned your IP?

CTcelt1988

uponahill wrote: »

I can fully understand the reasons for DLA whilst being unemployable, but cannot for the life of me see the connection with money being given so that they can earn their own money.
Surely working and earning means that they can be self sufficient.
You could say that they need it for a Motability car or for carers or for whatever, but if you are earning your own money how on earth does the extra become so important? Buy your own car, pay for acrers etc out of income that you earn.

Surely PIP should only be given to those that are unemployable due to a disability or at the best can only do a few hours of light work. Why would would someone who works 40 hrs a week need it?
The mind boggles!!

Just because someone works 40 hours a week doesnt mean they can afford a car. I earn £13,360 a year and I cannot afford to buy my own car. I would also have to pay for adaptions, which I couldnt afford. Without Motability, I would have to give up my job as i work 30 miles away. Public transport is not a option for me. Stop being so down on disabled people all the time, you sound quite mean and nasty.

pstuart

CTcelt1988 wrote: »

Just because someone works 40 hours a week doesnt mean they can afford a car. I earn £13,360 a year and I cannot afford to buy my own car. I would also have to pay for adaptions, which I couldnt afford. Without Motability, I would have to give up my job as i work 30 miles away. Public transport is not a option for me. Stop being so down on disabled people all the time, you sound quite mean and nasty.

Well said but you should ignore this Troll that has poisoned MSE on many occassions under various names and titles.

Its a sad situation that the 100+ people that have thanked it have been taken in - they walk amongst us!

seven-day-weekend

I know a young man who uses a wheelchair as he can't walk due to spina bifida; he has a motability car.....but there is no reason why he can't work full-time in an accessible office. However, without the car, he would not be able to get there! That is what his DLA is for. He can't use public transport like a person without his disability. So without his specially adapted car he would be unable to work.