MSE News: Half a million could lose disability benefits

evenasus

Broke_n_Broken wrote: »

DIDN'T YOU KNOW???

All disabled people are lying, cheating, benefit scrounging scum.

I know they're not and the genuine do need help. But there are people claiming disability benefit who are benefit cheats.

Some 'illnesses' are so easy to feign and not so easy to disprove.

I also think DLA should be means tested.

~Chameleon~

evenasus wrote: »

I know they're not and the genuine do need help. But there are people claiming disability benefit who are benefit cheats.

Some 'illnesses' are so easy to feign and not so easy to disprove.

I also think DLA should be means tested.

And which are they?

Dunroamin

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

And which are they?

Depression for a start. (And I speak as a sufferer.)

Mojisola

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

And which are they?

Dunroamin wrote: »

Depression for a start. (And I speak as a sufferer.)

Also the traditional "bad back" and other things like ME.

I know how hard it is to get benefits if you have ME and just how easy it would be for someone to fake it.

It's often only by putting people under surveillance that you can catch them out.

evenasus

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

And which are they?

Dunroamin wrote: »

Depression for a start. (And I speak as a sufferer.)

Mojisola wrote: »

Also the traditional "bad back" and other things like ME.

I know how hard it is to get benefits if you have ME and just how easy it would be for someone to fake it.

It's often only by putting people under surveillance that you can catch them out.

Bipolar is another popular one.

bigboybrother

FBaby wrote: »

Lymphomaniac (had to smile at your choice of name!!), I genuinely don't think one person here, however anti-benefits they come across, would dare saying that such schemes as motability cars are not right for people like you. That is EXACTLY what the scheme was intended for, to help people like you.

My main issue with motability cars who don't really need a car, but have them for their family to use (but of course, they make sure to do a bit of shopping for the disabled person whilst they do their big weekly shopping so that they can justify it is not for their own use), or those who get it for one child, when they have 3 children or more and would have paid for a car any way even if they didn't have disabled children, but it suits them to use it as a family car rather than spend the DLA purely on the disabled child.

I really wish more people like you got more benefit from DLA whilst it is axed for those who clearly use it to upgrade the lifestyle of their family.

Oh I know some of those!

My son, who works in the local primary school is forever mentioning (no names ever given, but I know who they are) those parents that are known to be on benefits, turn up at the school gates driving a new people carrier. Strange really that only a few months earlier those same parents are demanding reports from the school saying how difficult little 'Jimmy' is with his condition.
The poor child never sees any of the money, he/she doesn't really care what type, age or condition the family car is in.

My neighbour two doors away is in his late 70's and receives HRM. He doesn't see the cash, he has a motability car. Nothing wrong with that, but when that car disappears for months on end, taken by his daughter and son in law, it really makes you wonder what use he gets out of it. I have asked him about this once and he, quite understandably, said that his daughter and son in law need the car to come and see him - errr 4 times a year!

bigboybrother

evenasus wrote: »

I know they're not and the genuine do need help. But there are people claiming disability benefit who are benefit cheats.

Some 'illnesses' are so easy to feign and not so easy to disprove.

I also think DLA should be means tested.

I think 'cheat' is a too general term. There are those that openly cheat the system and there are those that exagerate their problems and needs although having a disability.

Those that exagerate are difficult to spot because without being regularly monitored, no one for sure would really know the true extent of those disabilities and needs.

Yes there are quite a few conditions that give rise to care and mobility problems. The difficulty is proving who are the ones that 'put it on a bit'.

Can someone actually walk 100 metres - yes, can they demonstrate that they can't walk more than 20 metres - yes.

As for it being means tested - I am all for that. It is totally wrong for a multi-millionaire jackpot winner to still keep his motability car.

I would also cut out all of the 'added premiums' that come with DLA when claiming a means tested benefit. If you are awarded the benefit fine, but then why should you be awarded another benefit because you already get one.

~Chameleon~

Dunroamin wrote: »

Depression for a start. (And I speak as a sufferer.)

Depression is not easy to fake. I certainly couldn't fool anyone into thinking I'm depressed when I'm not and those around me often know when I am depressed long before I would admit to it.

~Chameleon~

evenasus wrote: »

Bipolar is another popular one.

You think people can fake being bipolar??? Heard it all now!! :rotfl: :rotfl:

Just shows the misconceptions people have and obviously very little experience of real mental illness.

~Chameleon~

Mojisola wrote: »

Also the traditional "bad back" and other things like ME.

I know how hard it is to get benefits if you have ME and just how easy it would be for someone to fake it.

It's often only by putting people under surveillance that you can catch them out.

I've often heard that people claim to have "bad backs" but surely if someone was truly in such pain they would have consultants letters, MRI scans, strong pain medication etc as evidence. I'm sure you can't just say you've got a bad back and then claim benefits.

As for ME, not sure about that one. Don#t know anyone with it so know idea whether one could fake it or not. Again, I'd assume you would need medical evidence to claim.

As you say, surveillance would soon "out" a person claiming to be ill when they're not.