Sanctions' figures

FBaby

If it is truly that biased and very much about down to how well one 'interviews' for the group, doesn't it discriminate against integrity and honesty?

tea-bag

FBaby wrote: »

If it is truly that biased and very much about down to how well one 'interviews' for the group, doesn't it discriminate against integrity and honesty?

It has always been the way when claiming sickness/disability benefits. Nobody ever describes how they feel day to day just their worst days. It just seems a lot have bad days once or twice a year on assessment days or doctor visits. That is why there are so many healthy looking disabled parked in carparks as it must be a good day.

merlin68

Must be good to have x ray vision. you don't have to be in a wheelchair to have a blue badge. You could have cancer, be blind, deaf anything even epilepsy.

billywilly

FBaby wrote: »

If it is truly that biased and very much about down to how well one 'interviews' for the group, doesn't it discriminate against integrity and honesty?

It has nothing to do with integrity or honesty. It is all to do with proving entitlement to descriptors to gain enough points and the SG. Of course it is biased. You can't honestly believe that the DWP are your best friends?

rogerblack

FBaby wrote: »

I'm sure I read on this forum about people inquiring about having to attend these meetings and being advised that they don't have to go. Maybe it is when they are in receipt of CA, or looking after children?

There are many cases when people do not have to attend meetings they are told they have to go to.
Work program providers often have poor grasp of the law, intentionally or not, and require people in the support group to attend, when there is no legal basis for this.
The DWP can choose to waive the requirements for an in-person WFI if it's not appropriate, and a work program provider can contact the claimant once over a two year period. However, nothing stops them requiring vastly more.

Can't? All of them? Waiting times are always brought up as an excuse in these circumstances, especially in regards to mental health, yet I know that in my area, almost everyone start treatment within 18 weeks of referral, so if you are referred as you get put in the WRAG (assuming you can't before), surely that gives plenty of time to start treatment before the 12 months are over?

And in that 18 weeks, their condition has gotten harder to treat by being delayed, perhaps requires a longer course of treatment, the NHS will need to pay more to complete the treatment, they will not have been paying tax, other members of the family may have had to take time off work, ...

I can't see what would be the incentive for everyone to be put in the Support group to consider that they might be capable of going back to work, unless they really really want to go back to work, but it shouldn't be about want but ability.

Getting out of the house?
Seeing people?
Having your own money?

I am not arguing that people should not work if they can.
I am arguing that the effective support for helping people with marginal abilities to work back into work are deeply flawed.
It also needs realised that some people are never going to be capable of 16h+, and need to be able to be supported while they do whatever work they are able of.

You keep mentioning '12 months' - the work group is not, and never has been for those expected to be able to work within 12 months.

tea-bag

merlin68 wrote: »

Must be good to have x ray vision. you don't have to be in a wheelchair to have a blue badge. You could have cancer, be blind, deaf anything even epilepsy.

So why would you need a blue badge with entitlement to a wider space and closer access to areas with free parking if you are deaf? Epileptic? Or do I say it blind? Why can't you leave these spaces for people who need them with chairs and mobility problems? If you can walk fine. This is another area that needs looking at. Anybody using a badge fraudulently should have there car seized and it costs $1000 to get it back.

FBaby

And in that 18 weeks, their condition has gotten harder to treat by being delayed, perhaps requires a longer course of treatment, the NHS will need to pay more to complete the treatment, they will not have been paying tax, other members of the family may have had to take time off work, ..

18 weeks in the longest, that doesn't mean everyone waits that long, most wait no longer than 6 weeks. Why always focusing on the low percentage rather than the majority?

Getting out of the house?
Seeing people?
Having your own money?

As opposed to freedom of doing what you want in your time, not having to be accountable to bosses and colleagues, not experiencing the fatigue that comes with commuting, all this so that at the end of the month, your disposable income is even lower? Mmmm, sorry but not convinced at all.

You can't honestly believe that the DWP are your best friends?

I just assumed there were people clever enough to come up with descriptors designed to assess if claimants are capable of work....at least to a certain level of confidence if obviously not 100% which it could never be. The way it is coming across is that those descriptors can easily be manipulated to say anything.

merlin68

tea-bag wrote: »

So why would you need a blue badge with entitlement to a wider space and closer access to areas with free parking if you are deaf? Epileptic? Or do I say it blind? Why can't you leave these spaces for people who need them with chairs and mobility problems? If you can walk fine. This is another area that needs looking at. Anybody using a badge fraudulently should have there car seized and it costs $1000 to get it back.

Don't ask me, i don't make the rules.
You are entitled to a blue badge if blind.
You could have heart or lung failure or bulky medical equipment that needs carrying round.
We had one for dd when she was tube fed.

tea-bag

merlin68 wrote: »

Don't ask me, i don't make the rules.
You are entitled to a blue badge if blind.
You could have heart or lung failure or bulky medical equipment that needs carrying round.
We had one for dd when she was tube fed.

Blind I sort of understand due to obstacles however most blind people won't drive alone so would have some help. Most just see a blue badge as a added perk.

Podge52

tea-bag wrote: »

Blind I sort of understand due to obstacles however most blind people won't drive alone so would have some help. [STRIKE]Most[/STRIKE] I just see a blue badge as a added perk.

I would hope all blind people don't drive rather than most of them.;)