DWP

I think this may be a repeat of some of what has been said earlier but I was so shocked I thought it worth bringing on.

The DWP have as good as admitted that mandatory reconsiderations are a sham. In response to a recent Freedom of Information query, the DWP revealed that they have a target of upholding the original decision in 80% of all mandatory reconsideration requests.

The DWP have since claimed that PIP is not included in the 80% target. However, it remains the case that over 80% of PIP mandatory reconsideration requests also fail to get the decision changed – however coincidental the DWP might claim that figure is. Having a target for the percentage of requests that should fail almost certainly renders the mandatory reconsideration process unlawful.

www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/3632-24-may-2017-update?utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Benefits and Work&utm_content=v2+May+24+2017+newsletter

Another tragic death related to the DWP :

www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/15304393.Heartbreaking_last_words_of_grandfather_who_took_his_life_after_DWP_investigation/?commentSort=score#

The DWP left this man worrying for months about how much money he might have to repay to them, because of a simple mistake he had made.

This is what Rigby has been talking about with regard to bereavement benefits.

voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/05/06/tory-voters-want-the-bereaved-to-be-penalised-for-losing-their-loved-ones/

It still affects 600,000 people, Galen, however you look at it.
Government figures.

The distance is less than 20metres. The old mobility was less than 50metres.

as I said before my daughter wanted to apply for PIP because she wants a blue badge for her car...so she can take her girls out without worrying she might have a walk she cant manage,She has now been told she has to be ON the benefit and /or have proof she cant walk a reasonable distance to qualify for the badge .She doen't want the MONEY just the badge ! So she'll be back at her doctors and at CAB for yet more advice .Its never ending .

The biggest saving is probably from the change in who gets a car or not

researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06861

When fully introduced, it is expected that around 600,000 fewer people will receive PIP than would have got DLA, and expenditure will be £2.5 billion a year lower than it would otherwise have been.

From the House of Commons library as mentioned in the previous link.

It's easier to get standard rate PIP than it was to get middle rate cre DLA

The whole idea behind PIP was to get 600,000 more disabled people off benefits and to save £2.5 billion.

speye.wordpress.com/2017/05/03/disability-benefits-tory-lies-and-the-failing-welfare-rights-system/

skwalker1964.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/homeless-children.jpg?w=560

An apology to Theresa May!

Thanks Rigby.

In fact my friend just told me this pm that he's had a small increase.
He lost half a leg in the accident.

My understanding is that there are no plans to reduce Industrial Injuries Benefit - but then who was aware of the plans to slash, yes slash, bereavement benefits? My guess would be that as these are relatively generous, the Tories will go after them but will do what they did with the bereavement benefits, reduce them for new claimants. Even this government aren't stupid enough to change them for existing claimants <famous last words> but they would if they thought they would get away with it.

I don't know if this has been mentioned already -
Are there any plans to reduce Industrial Injuries Benefit? I've had a quick Google but didn't see anything.
Not for me, but for my friend's husband. It's their main source of income.

I'll post it if I find it. I spent a few minutes looking before I posted, but couldn't find it. I just remembered the 70% figure and was surprised.

From memory, indirect taxation wasn't counted, nor were communal benefits such as roads, clean air/water, border control, security staff and the police, etc. When those are included, we benefit even more from the state.

I can't remember whether the NHS was included, but I don't think it was. If it was, some people benefit far more than others.

Have you a link to that study, dd?

I was just wondering if it was done purely on NI contributions in, benefits out, or whether income tax and indirect taxation was taken into account?

The IFS did a study a couple of years ago about how much people contribute to or take from the state (ie pooled resources) over their lifetime.

It showed that about 70% of people take more from the state over time than they pay into it.

Obviously many of the 30% resent paying more and want to hang on to their money. Many of them delude themselves that they deserve it, ignoring facts such as luck, inheritance, genes, a rigged economic system, etc. They don't seem to recognise that many others have worked as hard as they did, but just weren't so lucky.

In a democracy, the 30% would never win, so they use all sorts of sweeteners and divisive tactics so the 70% turn on themselves, hence the strivers versus shirkers rhetoric. People have been encouraged to turn on benefit recipients as "not deserving", not realising that they are also recipients of state support.

That's okay, dj.

It's horrendous that this sort of incompetence seems to be standard for Atos. And that the DWP just accepts it all casually and leaves people to suffer.

The graph posted by daphnedill shows that the poorer you are, the larger the percentage of your income is being eroded by changes to tax and benefits.

Meantime, the richer you are, the more likely it is that tax and benefits will be giving you an improvement in your income.

Sorry, FarNorth. Just realised that the above post was the same as yours last week.

voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/05/02/tory-policy-inaction-atos-cock-up-leaves-stroke-victim-without-benefits-and-in-fear-of-homelessness/

Paddyann quite recently my daughter was told she is lacking vit D and does now have supplements. Didn't realise it might take so long to kick in. It's hardly surprising as she's rarely able to get outside! Mind you I read recently that almost everyone in Scotland needs a vit D supplement!

The Institute of Fiscal Studies has produced a Briefing Note to inform people about the impact of tax and benefit changes in advance of the general election.

Key findings

Increases to the income tax personal allowance and higher rate threshold, costing the government around £5 billion per year, have been the biggest change to taxes or benefits so far this parliament.
These have benefited most basic-rate taxpayers to the tune of £160 a year, while most higher-rate taxpayers have gained £380 a year. However, for the latter group all this giveaway is doing is reversing most of the effect of the cuts in the higher-rate threshold in the last parliament. And cuts in pension tax relief, on top of a large number of tax increases in the last parliament, have hit those with the very highest incomes.

While cuts to benefits have been small as of yet, government plans for future cuts would significantly reduce the incomes of low-income working-age households, particularly those with children.
The most important changes are the cash freeze in most benefit rates, cuts to child tax credit and the continued rollout of the less generous universal credit.

If these planned cuts were fully in place now, nearly 3 million working households with children on tax credits would be an average of £2,500 a year worse off, with larger families losing more.
The 1 million families with children and nobody in paid work would be £3,000 per year worse off on average. But it is important to stress that many of the changes will not create immediate losses of benefit income, because of protections for existing claimants.

Planned cuts will have a bigger effect on the entitlements of the poorest families than the cuts made by the coalition.
More broadly the period since 2010 has seen lower-income households lose as a result of benefit cuts and the richest households lose from increases in income tax. But those on average and moderately high incomes, as well as most pensioners, have seen their incomes almost completely protected on average.

www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9164

(Click on the chart to make it bigger of go to the link for the full briefing note)

www.thenational.scot/news/15248404.DWP_tell_stroke_victim_to_use_food_banks_after_Atos_error_leaves_him_with_no_DLA_payments/

Just another mess from the DWP.

mcem hhas your daughter had hher Vitamin D llevels checked? My daughter has had blood tests continuously for the past 3 years or more and it wasn't pickked up that she had absolutely NO vitamin D in her system ,the lovely new doctor was shocked when he found out and has started her on a high dose ,BUT he says it may take up to a year to make a real difference ,though it should help considerably with the muscle pain ....we live in hope

13 million disabled people and they are all going to vote. Not many for the Tories.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/general-election-8-may-disabled-people-vote-against-tories-conservatives-dwp-scope-89-per-cent-a7691451.html