Transfer from DLA to PIP for older folks?

cyclonebri1

nannytone wrote: »

there is a difference between disability and the natural agiing process though.

DLA/PIP is only paid for the disability.

i am blind and will continue to be blind.
that is what i receive DLA for. any changes due to the natural process of waging aren't pRT OF MY DLA CLAIM

This is where i was leading this thread, yes, you expect issues due to aging, but there must be a big temptation for the powers that be to think, "Oh, he/she is just getting old and can't accept it".

I can see both sides of that hence the concern. I mix with blokes 20 years older than me, they can do far more than me.

I just answer the questions and hopefully my full and sometimes embarrassing medical history backs it up,

nannytone_2

i understand what you're saying.
too many people class 'getting' old as being a fdisability.
what you need to do is compare yourself with your peers.
not everyone is super fit and physically able ... but if your within a reasonable degree of other people the same age, then it is raging and not disability

cyclonebri1

nannytone wrote: »

i understand what you're saying.
too many people class 'getting' old as being a fdisability.
what you need to do is compare yourself with your peers.
not everyone is super fit and physically able ... but if your within a reasonable degree of other people the same age, then it is raging and not disability

Exactly my point:T

cyclonebri1

nannytone wrote: »

thats how it has always been. if entitled before 65th birthday then you keep it IF you continue to be entitled

But not now, you get re-assessed for PP whatever. I had that same assumption , don't really see where NT sits on this.

You are affirming what I thought in post #8 when everyone says it's no longer the case???, Confused?, I am now.

Or did you mean "you kept it"

w06

If you're entitled to it you keep it. Plenty of us in our 20s, 30s 40s 50s will also never ever get better.

The only way to be fair is to reassess everybody periodically, exempting one group arbitarily from reassessment is unfair.

The alternative is the DLA system where some people who weren't very disabled ended up with higher rate care and mobility without a face to face assessment and were not reassessed, and so one mistake was carried forward potentially for their lifetime.

Reassessment occasionally seems fair for being given up to £7000/year. The way of dealing with not going to improve conditions in the PIP system is an ongoing award, that's not reviewed for at least 10 years (but with usual responsibilities to report a change).

cyclonebri1

I totally agree with you, it's just the differing ways folks are saying it, ie if you are entitled to it at 65 you keep it. I fully understand that if you don't deserve it you shouldn't get it, but younger folks won't get the worry and need for assurance that comes with old age untill later.

You actually start ticking off things you no longer need to worry about, well I do anyway, future medicals, the stress of dealing with them is something that does worry.

For any younger folks you have my sympathy, at least I got to 55 before the issues kicked in.

It's people with genuine mental health issues I feel for, they seem to be easy fodder for the decision makers if what I read here is factual.