MSE News: Fears raised over digital benefits system

lovinituk

eadieb wrote: »

Disabled people and long term health problems, are likely to be negatively affected by this change - young or old or in the middle! Physical or mental health or learning disability.

For example, I am currently assisting a 50 year old lady (through my work) who has a mild brain injury and mental health problems. She suffers with extreme anxiety, nervousness and forgetfullness. She keeps going to cashpoints, drawing out cash from her account and then forgetting she has done it. sometimes 4 or 5 times a day she has taken cash out and does not know what she has spent it on. Im trying to get her to set up 2 bank accounts to keep her direct debits separate from her spending account so that she avoids using all her cash too quickly and having direct debits bounce. Im encouraging her to come to the local library to try and get her to use a computer but because of her brain injury she is likely to forget how to use it and she is genuinely extremely fearful of going there.

her disabilities are too low need for her to get any care or help from statutory services in our area. I am funded to help her for up to 9 months but after that she is on her own. her family members in the local area are not of use as they have been implicated in using her money for themselves.

this is just one example of someone who will find the change very difficult as she finds it so hard to ask for help.

How would that be any different if the system didn't change? Surely she would still struggle once your help expires even with the current system in place?

MissMoneypenny

challfour wrote: »

I have found 9 within 2 miles of my home!

I found 5 centres within 1 mile of my home. That's a good map:T

Most people have their own internet connection anyway and don't some junk food shops have hotspots?

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

lovinituk wrote: »

Or you could just do it for her!!! Jeez - mountain out of a molehill or what?!?

She has a habit of hitting people.



That and you are of course assuming that she would be prepared to share confidential financial information with me when she doesn't even let people inside her house.


And that I would be prepared to take that risk with my own safety for her benefit. Which I am not.


Doesn't mean that the idea isn't a stupid one. Proves it, IMO, as it means people not able to deal with it are abandoned if they can't get somebody else to deal with it for them.

John_Clark

Sheesh lets hope its better organized than the NHS computer system.
Not wishing to be derogatory, but if trained and well equipped NHS professionals can't make it work, what chance is there for benefit claimants?

source: Wikipedia NHS_Connecting_for_Health
Originally expected to cost £2.3 billion over three years, in June 2006 the total cost was estimated by the National Audit Office to be £12.4bn over 10 years, and the NAO also noted that "...it was not demonstrated that the financial value of the benefits exceeds the cost of the Programme". Similarly, the British Computer Society (2006) concluded that "...the central costs incurred by NHS are such that, so far, the value for money from services deployed is poor. Officials involved in the programme have been quoted in the media estimating the final cost to be as high as £20bn, indicating a of 440% to 770% In April 2007, the Public Accounts Committie issued a damning 175-page report on the programme. The Committee chairman claimed "This is the biggest IT project in the world and it is turning into the biggest disaster." The report concluded that, despite a probable expenditure of 20 billion pounds "at the present rate of progress it is unlikely that significant clinical benefits will be delivered by the end of the contract period."
The costs of the venture should have been lessened by the contracts signed by the IT providers making them liable for huge sums of money if they withdrew from the project; however, when Accenture withdrew in September 2006, then Director-General for NPfIT Richard Grainger charged them not £1bn, as the contract permitted, but just £63m. Granger's first job was with Andersen Consulting, which later became Accenture.

lovinituk

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

She has a habit of hitting people.



That and you are of course assuming that she would be prepared to share confidential financial information with me when she doesn't even let people inside her house.


And that I would be prepared to take that risk with my own safety for her benefit. Which I am not.


Doesn't mean that the idea isn't a stupid one. Proves it, IMO, as it means people not able to deal with it are abandoned if they can't get somebody else to deal with it for them.

...or she will be able to pick up the phone and talk to them.

sniggings

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

It's still the same amount of money though. I understand that some people will spend it all at once, but they need to learn money management skills really, don't they?

If they were at work they would have to manage their money monthly, in most cases.

it's not about spending it all at once, making £50-£70 last a week is not easy no matter how you try and manager it, making £220 a week last is a lot easier, so it's not as simple as saying if workers can do it so can those on benefits.

seven-day-weekend

sniggings wrote: »

it's not about spending it all at once, making £50-£70 last a week is not easy no matter how you try and manager it, making £220 a week last is a lot easier, so it's not as simple as saying if workers can do it so can those on benefits.

I agree it is hard to make that amount of money last a week. What I don't understand is why being paid monthly will make it more difficult. You can still split it into weekly 'chunks'.

[Deleted User]

Charityworker wrote: »

That has got to be the most petty,ignorant, pathetic, nasty thing I've ever read on here. I bet your such a perfect person!

Why should people on benefits even have mobile phones? Benefits money is to allow you to stay alive not to pay for mobiles, fags, booze, tattoos etc.

People who work are the ones who get to have luxuries. Lazy !!!!!! cant expect the rest of us to pay for them.

chinagirl

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I agree it is hard to make that amount of money last a week. What I don't understand is why being paid monthly will make it more difficult. You can still split it into weekly 'chunks'.

...................................

Those of society that will be able to manage a monthly figure would do so if working and earning a good wage, or if on benefits. It is those left, who are unable to manage their own affairs successfully, and need a little help. Yes, they may lead chaotic lives or have been dealt a rough hand in life. However these are the groups of people most likely to become homeless, due to non-payment of Rent, as they have not budgeted efficiently. There will be even more family breakdowns and evictions and the homeless problem in our society will increase substantially, with the total cost of housing more and more people in B&B accomodation is likely to be greater than any money saved by the new system.

I once heard a quote that said:

'We can judge a Society by the way it treats its less able members'

If this be true, I don't think I like what we are turning ourselves into!!

tommy45

Invalidation wrote: »

Dont worry people !
It will probably be administered by ATOS.


I'll get me coat.

Surely you mean they don't give ATOS About the sick and disabled people Yes i note that ATOS healthcare is a trading name of ATOS I.T. services UK LTD which is part of the ATOS group, So joking apart it may well get the contract for it,