60% Set To Lose Benefits In DLA Reforms
Janey Jones
Posts: 878 Forum Member
✭✭
Changes to existing awards have now been deferred until 2015, however the Government appear to have already set another arbitrary target of 60% of claimants who will have their benefits reduced or stopped altogether:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2247290/Disability-handouts-cut-stopped-330-000-claimants-Government-aims-end-welfare-life.html
:eek: :mad:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2247290/Disability-handouts-cut-stopped-330-000-claimants-Government-aims-end-welfare-life.html
:eek: :mad:
0
Comments
Now lots of people will come and post messages doubting the veracity of the Daily Mail article....;)
Probably right in this instance as they love to have a pop at benefits claimants and are no doubt rubbing their hands in glee. I suspect your average Daily Mail journalist\reader will happily spit at the poor people and disabled living on the streets in a few years time. Either that or they will all end up in concentration camps.
you can claim benefits for that (but not for long).:D
Who else is going to fill in the claim form then?
Trying to paint it as 'a self certified' benefit when it is not at all. Anyone can fill in a form, whether you get it depends on the information to back the claim up. Also 'for life' claims are not awarded now as far as I know and in the past they were only given rarely to people with incurable problems. Again, all backed up with independent medical reports and subject to assessment by dwp doctors before atos came in to being.
Like laying off over 2000 Remploy workers so now they can call them welfare scroungers too. The Tory Party is sick to its core.
I don't suggest, I say that, that is poppycock.
Why does it need reform?
No person ever got a claim for life without independent verification and medical reports. They would have seen a dwp doctor or atos at some time during their claim as well.
*Before atos became involved, medicals were carried out by Doctors employed by the dwp. (DSS)
Firstly, it is not true that 7 in 10 go through the system without proper checks. Figures from last year show that the main (not only) source of information used for new claims was 16% claim form only, 42% GP report, 6% medical exam, 36% other source (eg personal care plan report, occupational therapist/physio/hospital report etc). Bearing in mind that 55% of applications were turned down it is safe to assume that most (if not all) the claim form only category were turned down.
Re the increase in claimants, the Mail and government propaganda of course ignores the real picture. Demogaphic factors mean that the true increase is 13% in the last 9 years.
I do not see why the 1 in 17 adults figure is that startling. Given our ageing population, around 1 in 6 are disabled, so that would mean only 1 in 3 qualified for even the most basic amount of £20pw.
It is not true that 71% get DLA for life. Lifetime awards were abolished under Labour. People on indefinite awards can be re-examined at any point.
The supposed overpayments are not even true overpayments as the DWP have always pointed out. DLA is actually overpaid by £220m pa, but underpaid by £300m pa, so a net underpayment of £80m pa.
As for McVey, she is spouting exactly the same hyperbole as Miller. Medical advancements have not cured most of the serious conditions, but have managed to keep ill and disabled people alive for longer.
As for the 60% figure to lose their award or get a reduced award, that is a wild presumption from the rag. Even if that happened with the first batch, a group reporting a change of circumstance or on a short term award (as they have a less serious disability) will not reflect what will happen to those with a more serious disability.
The DLA impact assessment states that instead of 2.2 million working age claimants in 2015/16, there will be 1.7 million...ie just under 25% less. The forecast of who will get what is in the same impact assessment.
As for the supposed use of "medical experts", Atos are using just 19 doctors for the whole of the south and north of the country!
As for why the vicious, arbitrary, savings are being made, Cameron revealed all yesterday when he admitted " We are raising more money for the rich. "
True. You never know when someone's legs will grow back.
The article actually says there are 3.2m claimants of DLA and ministers intend to reassess an initial 560,000 claimants, a group consisting of those who report a change in circumstance or who have been given a time-limited award that comes to an end, and expect that 330,000 or nearly 60 per cent will get no award or a reduced sum after the checks.
It is reasonable to have concerns over a benefit where the number claiming it has trebled over 20 years and the bill runs to over £13b p.a.
2015/16 16-64 PIP rate combination
Forecast caseload under the second draft criteria
Enhanced mobility, enhanced daily living
340,000
Enhanced mobility, standard daily living
190,000
Enhanced mobility, no daily living
230,000
Standard mobility, enhanced daily living
110,000
Standard mobility, standard daily living
250,000
Standard mobility, no daily living
190,000
No mobility, enhanced daily living
90,000
No mobility, standard daily living
250,000
Total
1,700,000
2015/16 DLA 16-64 rate combination
Forecast caseload
Higher Mobility, Higher Care
350,000
Higher Mobility, Middle Care
290,000
Higher Mobility, Lowest Care
270,000
Higher Mobility, No Care
130,000
Lower Mobility, Higher Care
170,000
Lower Mobility, Middle Care
450,000
Lower Mobility, Lowest Care
230,000
Lower Mobility, No Care
50,000
No Mobility, Higher Care
10,000
No Mobility, Middle Care
40,000
No Mobility, Lowest Care
190,000
Total
2,200,000
Much of the increase is down to demographic factors. Prior to the introduction of DLA people went onto Attendance Allowance on reaching age 65. With DLA, people can continue their claim beyond age 65. In 1992, therefore, there were no DLA claimants over the age of 65.
There are 1 now million DLA claimants over the age of 65. These people are of course protected yet again while the working age claimants take another arbitrary hammering, and of course the government and rags fail to provide a true picture of the increase in claimant numbers.
thats your assumption. if you can prove someone has, or is going to call them scroungers, please link to it. i for one woudn't call them that.
Although the Remploy ideal is a noble one, it was running at a loss, so hopefully future employment can be found for those laid off.
For certain disabilities we can and we should. So we need to spend money constantly checking things such as legs have grown back or blindness have gone away? Some disabilities can't go away. Why waste tax payers money on medicals and interviews for them. Some private company will be fleecing us no doubt, is it atos?
But why waste money on checking to see if a blind person still cannot see or such like. I thought we did niot believe in miracles these days.
The government needs to be much clearer about what the allowances are designed to achieve.
Don't you just love statistics and it will all change next year when DLA is replaced with PIP.
There are proper checks. I had a DWP doctor come to my house to assess me. He even checked the wheels of my chair and the tips on my sticks for signs of wear and tear.
I sent off every single letter, appointment and prescription list I've ever had over the past 3 years. My GP, neurologist, psychiatrist, rheumatologist, physiotherapist and MS nurse each had to fill in a form and provide medical evidence to back up my claim.
Also, what is "Genuine Disabled"?
:rolleyes: Don't be so silly and over dramatic.
I agree there are certain disabilities which have a permanent medical diagnosis and aren't going to change so such people will require ongoing financial support when PIP, the replacement for DLA, is introduced. I can only imagine for such people it is the rate they receive that will be reviewed.
Talk about hysterical overreaction.