Appeals Process Changes for DWP Benefits and Child Maintenance from 28th October 2013

sja75

portly1 wrote: »

You are right it won't affect me. I also doubt that the number that are complaining will all be affected and become destitute.

If things are that bad in not having any food in the house etc, there are plenty of charities that will help out in the interim.

How can I say without saying...

ani_26

portly1 wrote: »

I'm not talking fraud, I'm talking manipulation of the system.

People up to now only see £ notes. They don't want to go for a reconsideration because they know that they won't get paid. So what do they do, they play the system, ignore that step in the proceedings and go straight down the appeal route. Doing it that way will get them paid.

Whilst there will always be claimants who "manipulate" the system, there will be also many others who simply aren't aware of their entitlements, and simply don't even claim benefits they are entitled to claim. Imagine the system, then?

portly1 wrote: »

There are not that many people in this country that are that destitute. There will always be food and shelter provided by the various charities

In a perfect world?


Supply and demand, and all that...............................

portly1 wrote: »

That is your opinion - the reconsiderations could take days!!

I'm sure many claimants who have dealings with the Dwp, know the reality of dealing with the DWP, (although we rarely hear of positive Dwp experiences.)





5,052 people disagree, so far.



Once again, please sign the petition here, everyone :-




http://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ian-duncan-smith-targets-the-sick-vulnerable



Thanks


ani

osdset

The stupid thing with ConDems welfare reforms is that no matter how difficult they make it to claim JSA, the 'skivers' will find a way around it.

They can make the ATOS assessments near impossible to pass, but the fakers will circumvent it somehow.

The only people that will be caught in the net are those that really need benefits, it's a bit sick really.

portly1

osdset wrote: »

The stupid thing with ConDems welfare reforms is that no matter how difficult they make it to claim JSA, the 'skivers' will find a way around it.

They can make the ATOS assessments near impossible to pass, but the fakers will circumvent it somehow.

The only people that will be caught in the net are those that really need benefits, it's a bit sick really.

Surely the answer then is to be more savvy and learn from the 'skivers' and 'fakers'.

To expect the DWP to feel sorry for you because you simply don't know how to play the system will never happen.

ani_26

Bumping thread



http://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ian-duncan-smith-targets-the-sick-vulnerable

seven-day-weekend

I find it difficult to believe that in this country where, we are led to believe, people come from abroad and are given Benefits simply for the asking, that other people will spend a year with no money.

Surely if they have NOTHING, and I mean nothing, no spouse's income, no pension, no other Benefits, they will not have to remain in this state? There must be a source of income they can access?

portly1

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I find it difficult to believe that in this country where, we are led to believe, people come from abroad and are given Benefits simply for the asking, that other people will spend a year with no money.

Surely if they have NOTHING, and I mean nothing, no spouse's income, no pension, no other Benefits, they will not have to remain in this state? There must be a source of income they can access?

As the law stands at the moment, it is quite feasible to be somewhere in the middle between different benefits.

If you play the system to the point of law, many will find that they are not entitled to anything!

People have to 'find a way round' the system in order to get some money.

But I don't honestly believe that many if any are that destitute.
This whole argument is about people losing what they had been used to getting by manipulating the system for their own ends.

'How dare the government close that loophole and make me apply for a reconsideration instead of allowing me to lodge an appeal so I can get money quicker' - I hear many say!

seven-day-weekend

I can see that if they fail the ESA or UC checks for sickness, then they are allegedly eligible for JSA. But although they may actually not be well enough to work, the DWP iinsists they are not ill. Therefore they should be allowed to sign on while they are having a re-assessment for sickness Benenfit.

osdset

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I can see that if they fail the ESA or UC checks for sickness, then they are allegedly eligible for JSA. But although they may actually not be well enough to work, the DWP iinsists they are not ill. Therefore they should be allowed to sign on while they are having a re-assessment for sickness Benenfit.

Well unless the government significantly change the eligibility criteria for JSA where ESA claimants are concerned, they will not be able to claim.
Lord Freud has said on a number of occasions that 'there may be other benefits they can claim' JSA aside, he fails to elaborate on just what benefits he is referring to.

There have been cases where a claimant has failed the WCA and has been turned down for JSA because the JCP advisor could plainly see the person was unfit for work. They are then advised to claim ESA! It's a revolving door.

JSA 'customers' ostensibly have the means to find a job, they can change their circumstances, not receiving benefits whilst on appeal is unfortunate for them but at least they are able bodied and could change the situation.

IF an ESA 'customer' fails the WCA but is unable to work and is subjected to a lengthy mandatory reconsideration they should be paid whilst waiting for a DWP decision because they cannot change their circumstances, paid work isn't an option if they are sick/disabled.

That's the fundamental difference that the swivel eyed Tory nutters that bellyache about 'loopholes' fail to see.

rogerblack

osdset wrote: »

Well unless the government significantly change the eligibility criteria for JSA where ESA claimants are concerned, they will not be able to claim..

It's not quite that simple.

Firstly - something that's not been mentioned so far - if you are appealing a decision that you are fit for work, and fail to win the appeal - if you have not claimed JSA in the meantime - you will get no pay for the period between submitting the decision that you were not entitled and the end of the mandatory reconsideration period and the start of the appeal proper.

If you win - you would get ESA backpay over the whole period of course.
(With any JSA you claimed subtracted)

As to 'who can claim JSA' - well - there are problems here.
There will be several groups of claimants

If you go in with a fresh sicknote (to simplify things for the same condition), then you are not eligible for JSA, and will not be eligible under the new scheme.

Hoban mentioned that hardship payments can be claimed.

In principle, for many, this may be true, if the proper procedures are followed, and everyone agrees.

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/dmgch35.pdf

Hardship payments are not usually payable to people who just choose not to comply with the JSA requirements - but unfortunately these sanctions seem mandatory - the decisionmaker cannot decide not to impose them. If you absolutely can't - then your only option is hardship payments.

On who is a member of a vulnerable group, and entitled to hardship payments even though they are not actively seeking employment: (neglecting for the moment single parents, and others who may be entitled for other reasons)

Quote:
35070 A claimant should be treated as a member of a vulnerable group if they or their partner have a long-term medical condition
and
1.that condition restricts their functional capacity to carry out ordinary
activities because of physical impairment
and
2. that condition has lasted or is expected to last at least 26 weeks
and
3. the claimant or partner’s health would decline more than that of a normal healthy adult within two weeks of the DM’s decision
and
4.the person with the medical condition would suffer hardship if JSA is not paid
This has a number of issues. Assuming everything is done leniently.
You are not in hardship if you have any savings whatsoever.
A new condition that has caused an application for JSA will normally be 13 weeks ago. If you've been promptly rejected for ESA, and your condition is expected not to improve for another 10 weeks - you will not be entitled to hardship payments.
As to 'will deteriorate more than a normal person' - I don't know where to start.

Then - the real problems arise.
If the decisionmaker is not intending to be lenient.
Part of the evidence they are supposed to look at is listed as recent determinations of incapacity.
The problems for someone just denied ESA are obvious, if you have recently been assessed as 'able to carry out physical activities' while your doctor has signed you off for X, will a sicknote for the same condition, in the face of an ESA report saying the opposite have any weight in this decision.

(People entitled to any rate of DLA or PIP are entitled to the disability premium of JSA, so are seperately classed as a vulnerable group, as are some lone parents and others, mental conditions are mentioned seperately)