ESA Support Group

poppy12345

Hounded_out wrote: »

Poppy - does reg 35 still tend to apply ? I ask because I thought say 18 months back the DWP had sought to curb its use (by modifying the regn's , or the related guidance) ) for entry ... or a back door entry .. to the Support Group..

I accept that a claimant can obviously be re-assessed at any time, but the period between based on what I can see is getting longer and longer as time goes on. I sense that the OP's Mum has been unlucky, but will still hopefully keep her award. Just a shame about the stress and inconvenience it may cause.

Yes reg 35 still applies as clearly stated in my comment above, with the link to reg 35. I wouldn't have put the link up if it didn't still apply.



Everyone is different and has different award lengths. I really don't see what the problem is, as has been stated many times that people can be re-assessed at anytime. For some it's 6 months, while others it's longer. For those that haven't been re-assessed for years, they will catch up with them at some point.

Hounded_out

I was actually querying what came of the press stories about reg 35 being used as a back door entry to SG, and new guidelines( in 2017 ??) being introduced to reduce this (but not entirely stop it) occurring in the future. I had heard that the number of SG approvals via reg 35 had dropped off significantly in the past 18 months or so as a result. Any comment from an authoritative member would be appreciated.

elsien

Hounded_out wrote: »

Any comment from an authoritative member would be appreciated.

Now who's being rude. What is your definition of an authoritative member - someone who agrees with you?

Alice_Holt

elsien wrote: »

Now who's being rude. What is your definition of an authoritative member - someone who agrees with you?

It would seem Hounded out has a bit of history on these forums:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5659177/resigned-constructively-but&page=4#64
In which he appears to have posed an entirely fictitious employment scenario, and then roundly abused any poster who tried to help him.

Here is a comment from a forum guide:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5683491/unison-legal-representation-and-support-for-et-unfair-dismissal-claims#3


Therefore, I would suggest his comments really are best ignored - If forumites don't want unpleasantries directed at them, don't engage with this individual. You will only be wasting your time and effort.

Sample quotes from forumites on his employment thread:
"No help is actually needed Geoff1963, as the whole scenario is a fabrication."

Geoff1963 replied "A poster on MSE has wasted my time. Can I sue ? "

"I will try to provide constructive advice.
Originally posted by FBaby"
Reply by another forumite - !!!8221;Sadly you have just wasted your time.
Read my post a couple before yours and you will find that the OP has no employment issue, rather a totally different agenda."

"That really is the crux, the OP appears to enjoy belittling other users like he/she is a headmaster telling off primary school children.
But no one cares what the OP thinks given his/her inability to sting a consistent story together.
Speaks volumes about the OP."


Let's give Hounded Out a wide berth.
I would also suggest reporting his unpleasant posts.

---

"Posters seeking advice in this forum need to bear in mind that this is a public site on which anyone can post. You can't assume information is trustworthy, indeed some posters are known to disrupt, post disinformation, and tell tall stories.
The MSE forum team do not moderate this forum.

I would caution forumites to be wary of any advice supplied that doesn't contain a link to an authoritative site. Such sites include adviceguide, entitled to, turn2us, revenuebenefits, gov..uk.
Accredited benefit advice is available from local advice agencies such as Citizens Advice.

Please don't take horror stories about the benefit process, assessments, appeals etc at face value. There are posters on here who whose aim seems to be to alarm, frighten, and generally dissuade OP's from pursuing sensible actions to claim / regain the right benefits.

Harmful and misleading posters are easily identified by the reaction to their posts

Hounded_out

As per my recent post to 'PIP Assessor Lied' thread I have apologised for my so called past misdemeanours. And yes Elsien I was a bit sarcastic in asking for an authoritative response. I've corrected that below in order to be clearer. Apologies.

Anyhow, can anybody kindly answer this pertinent query:

"I was actually querying what came of the press stories about reg 35 being used as a back door entry to SG, and new guidelines( in 2017 ??) being introduced to reduce this (but not entirely stop it) occurring in the future. I had heard that the number of SG approvals via reg 35 had dropped off significantly in the past 18 months or so as a result. Any comment from a member who has any relevant knowledge would be appreciated."

...

poppy12345

Hounded_out wrote: »

As per my recent post to 'PIP Assessor Lied' thread I have apologised for my so called past misdemeanours. And yes Elsien I was a bit sarcastic in asking for an authoritative response. I've corrected that below in order to be clearer. Apologies.

Anyhow, can anybody kindly answer this pertinent query:

"I was actually querying what came of the press stories about reg 35 being used as a back door entry to SG, and new guidelines( in 2017 ??) being introduced to reduce this (but not entirely stop it) occurring in the future. I had heard that the number of SG approvals via reg 35 had dropped off significantly in the past 18 months or so as a result. Any comment from a member who has any relevant knowledge would be appreciated."

...

The new guidelines you're persistently talking about are here. Not everyone will qualify for this.

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/2017/october/guidance-work-capability-assessment-reassessment-published


A quick google found them.


I have no idea what you're talking about with reg 35. It's still very much the main route into the Support Group and a lot of people still get placed into the Support Group through this reg. This and the new guidelines are totally different.

Ames

The DWP issued new guidance on regulation 35 at the end of 2015. They said that assessors had to consider the benefits of working as well as the risks. From memory there was also something about the risk having to be substantial - suicide rather than just self harm. I can't find that now, but I came across it a few months ago when I was researching for my claim.

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/2016/september/dramatic-fall-numbers-placed-esa-support-group

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/government-rule-change-shuts-thousands-disability-benefits/

I assume this is what the OP is asking about.

Cheeky_Monkey

Primesuspect wrote: »

Thank you guys for your advice. I will try and fill in the form as soon as and return it first thing Monday morning. I am just hoping they don't call her for assesment. I remember back in 2014 she was awarded 0 points and moved to ESA work related group and had alot of issues. My mother has limited capability she needs help getting out of bed, suffers from sleeping disorder she's awake most nights and I have to wake up as she has panic attacks. Shes always at home and hardly leaves the house except for her appointments. Been like this since my dad passed away in 2008. Just hoping for the best

Apart from going abroad for 6 weeks of course.

They probably want to re-assess her because despite all her 'issues' above together with her severe anxiety, depression and lower back problem, they're wondering how she managed it.

Hounded_out

Thank you Poppy. I recollect that post the revised guidance on the use or applicability of reg 35 as another means (other than the conventional descriptors) of getting Support Group (SG) status that in early 2017, - I think that was the year - the number of re-assessed claims getting put into SG dropped off substantially. Not sure if that's still the case, however, as latest DWP stats show that the majority of ESA claimants, or certainly re-assessed claimants ,are being placed into the SG, but not sure how many do so based on the customary SG descriptors or due to a sole reliance on reg 35. I hope that makes sense. If you or anyone has the slightest interest in the above evidence then I can try to dig it out from a file I have. If not, well thanks anyhow.