This sort of thing annoys non disabled people

pipkin71

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

So it isn't always playing the system to get help, even if you can write and have normal intelligence.

I agree with you, sdw, and didn't mean for it to sound as though I was saying that everyone who asks for help is doing so in order to play the system.

What I meant was, that some people do seek the help of others and therefore are more likely to put everything on their forms rather than not go into detail about their illness

captain_mainwaring

p00 wrote: »

Perhaps this should be in the 'vent ' thread but this really annoys me.

My neighbour who hasnt worked for over 20 years (bad back) and gets not only a blue badge but full mobility as well and his wife carers allowance has been abroad in their new huge motorhome for 8 weeks earlier this year and now 9 weeks travelling around Europe - with their nice new expensive bicycles in the back.

Should people claiming benefits really be able to take these long extended holidays and still claim off us tax paying workers?

Mmmmm. I haven't worked for a long time now due to well, that's my business surely? I am in receipt of top rate DLA and lower rate carers allowance and have a BB.
I've been to France for a week in my 10 year old car and stayed in a Gite for £100. Is this excessive for someone on benefits?
I couldn't afford to stay any longer or in more expensive accomodation, maybe, that's a crime OP?
If your jetting off to Lanzarote or, similar this year good luck to you, I don't care! So give us disabled a break. If someone's swinging the lead all well and good. Report them but don't come on here looking for back up!
You've really got my goat posting your tongue lashing, nasty comment.

If you're going to do it, DO IT!

sparkycat2

pipkin71 wrote: »

I don't think that is necessarily the case for many claiming disability benefits, 1. because many people will seek the help of a benefit advisor in order to claim, 2. because people who are turned down are ready to appeal.

I'm sure, in some instances, there will be people who might not put everything in their application but there are many more looking up the DMG, using sites to help with the application and asking for help from benefit advisiors.

That's not to say that anyone doing the above are fraudulent claimants, but that they use the above in order to succeed in claiming disability benefits, and, to do that, they are more likely to give every detail of what the health issues are, to secure benefits, imo.

In my very imited experience you would be wrong. I know people who get very distressed at the having to detail their health problems and who are not forthcoming or downplay their condition or who due to mental health issues are unaware of how they are. Benefit advisors in my experience are very hit or miss as far as competence and often result in claimants underclaiming.

In my opinion the level of benefit people receive seems to be overly reliant on how people fill in forms with expert medical opinion and weight of medical evidence being used to verify the claim.

I think the system should be much more reliant on expert medical opinion and weight of medical evidence in determining award levels. Less reliant on information provided by the claimant.

The move to tick box forms and face to face assessments done by people who are not referring to the person's medical records and who are not competent to diagnosis the person's condition or give a prognosis for it. I see as a move in the wrong direction, as it seems to often mean that expert medical evidence and weight of medical evidence is only considered during the appeal process.

seven-day-weekend

sparkycat2 wrote: »

In my very imited experience you would be wrong. I know people who get very distressed at the having to detail their health problems and who are not forthcoming or downplay their condition or who due to mental health issues are unaware of how they are. Benefit advisors in my experience are very hit or miss as far as competence and often result in claimants underclaiming.

In my opinion the level of benefit people receive seems to be overly reliant on how people fill in forms with expert medical opinion and weight of medical evidence being used to verify the claim.

I think the system should be much more reliant on expert medical opinion and weight of medical evidence in determining award levels. Less reliant on information provided by the claimant.

The move to tick box forms and face to face assessments done by people who are not referring to the persons medical records and who are not competent to diagnosis the persons condition or give a prognosis for it. I see as a move in the wrong direction, as it seems to often mean that expert medical evidence and weight of medical evidence is only considered during the appeal process.

So then they shouldn't be surprised when they get less than they think they should. The DWP are not mind-readers! How do they expect people to know what their problems are if they don't tell them (or at least accept their limitations in this area and allow someone else to help them with the form)?

It isn't the DWP's job to diagnose the condition, it's their job to decide whether the person qualifies for the Benefit and unless the person themselves, or their representative, highlights their difficulties, they won't know what they are.

DUKE

No one forces you to work p00, & there will always be people who don't work for whatever reason. How would you like to swap the little bit of tax that you pay for a serious illness?

margaretclare

In response to insured, this was the comment I was responding to:

I am in the same situation as yourself except my accident was in Poland, but the same as you decided i moved back here because the benefits system here pays me much much more than it would anywhere else.

Hats off to you my fellow scrounger.

I did not mention Muslims, terrorists, or any of the other categories you listed. The historical analysis going back as far as Sir Oswald Mosley et al is interesting, but is in no way applicable to me. When someone posts 'Hats off to you, my fellow scrounger' while acknowledging that it's worthwhile being in the UK because benefits are so much better than in Poland, what else is one to say?

And further, I have not 'encouraged anyone to lie'. It is known that there are ways of wording an application in order to facilitate the application being successful. DH went to DIAL when he applied - he didn't do the application himself, although he's literate and articulate. He was told by the DIAL people that 'they know how it should be worded'. Are you going to accuse them of 'encouraging people to lie'?

And for your referring back to the old thread of 2008, here's what was said about me:

On average they (hip replacements ) last 10-15 years, what Margaret said was "If this second revision of hip replacement should fail again - or even if the opposite hip replacement, which is now 19 years old, should fail - I'll be back to square one"
I think she'd be mad to hand in her AA on the basis that for a few weeks she's been able to manage a little better than previously. One frosty morning and a slip on the ice and it won't be back to square one, it'll be far more serious. I'm not sure how old Margaret is, but one thing is certain and that is she isn't getting any younger. Falls are a major cause of disability and the leading cause of mortality due to injury in older people aged over 75 in the UK.

Yes, falls do cause much more than just breakages of bones. And for someone who says I don't need help with washing and dressing, yes I do.

Following that post by Ted, I fell and cracked myself on granite setts resulting in a fractured pelvis. That took 8 weeks on crutches, in which time I was back to needing help just to get out of bed. A woman on the 'Emergency Bikers' TV series recently had fractured her pelvis and (from memory) didn't survive the experience.

clemmatis

margaretclare wrote: »

And for your referring back to the old thread of 2008, here's what was said about me:

Yes, falls do cause much more than just breakages of bones. And for someone who says I don't need help with washing and dressing, yes I do.

Following that post by Ted, I fell and cracked myself on granite setts resulting in a fractured pelvis. That took 8 weeks on crutches, in which time I was back to needing help just to get out of bed.

I don't think anyone here doubts your word on your injuries, still, the points made in these posts concern me

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=10279255&postcount=33

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=10345571&postcount=34

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=10352531&postcount=36

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=10382371&postcount=38

sparkycat2

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

So then they shouldn't be surprised when they get less than they think they should.

Often they are unaware of what benefits they can claim and what award levels they should be getting. They maybe barely capable of managing to live independently or rely on assistance to do so.

People claiming benefits also include those living in the community in residential care homes, sheltered homes, supported homes, group homes, those with on call care teams, those reliant on carer's, etc...

Not all claimants of disability benefits are 100% competent at managing their own affairs, but that does not mean they all have appointees or conservators to manage their affairs. Or that when they seek assistance those assisting them in filling in forms, etc... are going to do a good job.

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

The DWP are not mind-readers! How do they expect people to know what their problems are if they don't tell them (or at least accept their limitations in this area and allow someone else to help them with the form)?

In my opinion the DWP should ask for evidence from those responsible for the care, diagnosis and treatment of the claimant and expert medical evidence and weight of medical evidence. As the primary source of information in making award decisions and decisions on award levels. Not just to verify what the person puts on the claim form.

I mean gee whiz if someone is claiming say care or mobility components of DLA they are likely to have people providing for those care and mobility needs, or be suffering detrimental effects to their life or be at severe risk.

If they are claiming DLA components due to mental disability or illness, it is not incomprehensible that they might not be very good at filling in forms and might not be the most reliable or competent source of information about their condition and capabilities.

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

It isn't the DWP's job to diagnose the condition, it's their job to decide whether the person qualifies for the Benefit and unless the person themselves, or their representative, highlights their difficulties, they won't know what they are.

The system in my opinion should be medical condition centric based on diagnosis and prognosis and expert opinion and hard evidence as to what the claimant is and is not capable of and the care and support they need.

Not capability centric based on opinion of what someone might or might not be capable off or what they see themselves as capable or not capable of doing.

margaretclare

To clemmatis and others: This was 4 years ago. As Ted Hutchinson wisely pointed out, nothing has got any better, and much is steadily getting worse.

clemmatis

margaretclare wrote: »

To clemmatis and others: This was 4 years ago. As Ted Hutchinson wisely pointed out, nothing has got any better, and much is steadily getting worse.

Yes, of course. But as I said, nobody (so far as I can tell) doubted your basic description then. They raised points about the propriety of your claiming AA for care needs when, it appeared -- and your own words there suggest -- in fact, you had mobility needs, for which you could not claim.

They did make some other points too, obviously.