[joss]

Autumn statement live updates: From B&W https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/autumn-statement-live-updates?utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Benefits+and+Work&utm_content=V2+22+November+2023+Newsletter

Most people with LCWRA will never face a WCA reassessment again
The DWP response to the WCA consultation says that most people who have been assessed as having limited capability for work-related activity will never have to be assessed again.

The DWP say

. . . we will bring forward a new offer – a Chance to Work Guarantee for existing claimants on UC and ESA with LCWRA. This change will be effective from 2025, at the same time as WCA changes are introduced. This change will in effect abolish the WCA for the vast majority of this group, bringing forward a key element of our White Paper proposals and giving people the confidence to try work.

9. These changes will mean that almost all people who are currently assessed as having LCWRA will never face a WCA reassessment again. Reassessments will only take place under very limited circumstances, which are:

When a claimant reports a change of circumstances in their health condition;
If a claimant has been awarded LCWRA for pregnancy risk, or cancer treatment where the prognosis for recovery is expected to be short-term;
If a claimant has been declared as having LCWRA under the new risk provisions; and
In cases of suspected fraud.
10. For the overwhelming majority of existing UC claimants, this is a guarantee that they will not be reassessed if they try work, and it does not work out. ESA claimants undertaking permitted work will also not be reassessed. Therefore, for both groups, we will remove the barrier that trying work may mean they lose their LCWRA entitlement

DWP response to the WCA consultation published
The DWP response to the WCA consultation has now been published.  They received 1,348 responses, which appear to have been overwhelmingly negative.

No changes will be made to:

Coping with social engagement

Continence

DWP say most existing claimants will not be affected
The DWP say in their press release that the new changes will not be introduced until 2025 and that most existing claimants will not be affected:

“These changes will not affect existing claimants whose circumstances remain the same, reflecting the need to ensure a continuity of service for them, and will mean that these claimants will not lose money as a result of the changes.”

Elsewhere, they add:

Under these changes, most existing claimants on health benefits will not need to be re-assessed with a new Work Capability Assessment. Re-assessments will only take place under limited circumstances, which are:

When a claimant reports a change of circumstances in their health condition;

If a claimant has been awarded LCWRA for pregnancy risk, or cancer treatment where the prognosis for recovery is expected to be short-term;

In cases of suspected fraud.

Changes to the substantial risk rule
In their consultation on WCA changes in September, the DWP suggested that the substantial risk rule could be changed as follows:

Alter the rule so that it would not apply where a person could take part in tailored or a minimal level of work preparation activity and/or where reasonable adjustments could be put in place to enable that person to engage with work preparation.

This appears to be what the DWP is now planning to do.

Getting about
The current points for ‘Getting about’ are shown below. These are to be reduced although we don’t know what to yet:

15. Getting about

15 (a) Cannot get to any place outside the claimant’s home with which the claimant is familiar.  15 points

15 (b) Is unable to get to a specified place with which the claimant is familiar, without being accompanied by another person 9 points

15 (c) Is unable to get to a specified place with which the claimant is unfamiliar without being accompanied by another person.  6 points

15 (d) None of the above apply.  0 points

The removed mobilising descriptors
It appears that the DWP plan to stop the following mobilising descriptors allowing claimants to be places in the support/LCWRA group.  These descriptors will still score 15 points for the purposes of limited capability for work, but will not allow access to the support/LCWRA group:

1.  Mobilising unaided by another person with or without a walking stick, manual wheelchair or other aid if such aid is normally, or could reasonably be, worn or used.

Cannot either:

(i)  mobilise more than 50 metres on level ground without stopping in order to avoid significant discomfort or exhaustion

or

(ii)  repeatedly mobilise 50 metres within a reasonable timescale because of significant discomfort or exhaustion.

Changes to the WCA revealed
A DWP press release has set out the changes they plan to make to the WCA:

Remove the ‘Mobilising’ part of the assessment that currently places people into a group where no work preparation is required – this will reflect that many of the claimants with these issues in the modern world of work will be able to undertake some work or work preparation with the right support
Amend the regulations that determine whether mental health issues are assessed as putting claimants at ‘Substantial Risk’ if they are required to undertake any level of work preparation – these amendments will realign the regulations with the original intention of applying only in exceptional circumstances, whilst still protecting and safeguarding the most vulnerable
Reduce the points awarded for some of the Limited Capability for Work (LCW) ‘getting about’ descriptors, reflecting the rise of flexible and home working opportunities in modern workplaces.
Over 90% of people denied LCWRA will not move into work
Although the Chancellor announced today that there will be changes to the WCA, we don’t know which of the changes set out in their consultation in September they have decided to adopt.

What we do know, however, thanks to the Office for Budget responsibility. is that the claims that the changes are to help people move into work are bogus.

The OBR has published its estimate of the changes to the incapacity caseload as a result of WCA reform.

By 2028/29 they estimate that there will be:

315,000 fewer people in the UC LCWRA group

56,000 fewer in the ESA support group

Making a total of 371,000 fewer people who get incapacity benefits without having any work related conditions.

But at the same time, they estimate that as a result there will be:

290,000 more people on LCW UC

51,000 more people in the ESA WRAG

Making a total increase of 342,000 (possibly some rounding) who have conditions applied to their benefit.

 

 

So, the OBR are expecting around 29,000 people, just 8% of claimants who are denied LCWRA/support group, to actually move off benefits as a result.  The other 92% will stay on incapacity benefits but just be around £400 a month worse off and subject to sanctions.

Thanks to Tom Pollard for tweeting about this.

 

Half a million people to be offered mental health treatment
The chancellor says they will halve the flow of people signed off work with no work search requirements:

Over 180,000 more people will be helped through the Universal Support programme and nearly 500,000 people will be offered treatment for mental health conditions and employment support.

Over the forecast period, the OBR judge these measures will more than halve the flow of people who are signed off work with no work search requirements.

At the same time we’ll provide a further £1.3 billion of funding to offer extra help to the 300,000 people who have been unemployed for over a year without any sickness or disability.

But we will ask for something in return.

If, after 18 months of intensive support, jobseekers have not found a job, we’ll roll out a programme requiring them to take part in mandatory work placements to increase their skills and improve their employability.

And if they choose not to engage with the work search process for six months, we will close their case and stop their benefits.

Taken together with the labour supply measures I have announced in the spring, the OBR say we will increase the number of people in work by around 200,000 at the end of the forecast period,  permanently increasing the size of the economy.

WCA to be ‘reformed’
The chancellor confirmed that changes are to be made to the work capability assessment (WCA) and to the fit note process, though no further details were given about the precise changes to the WCA.

The Chancellor said:

Every year we sign off over 100,000 people onto benefits with no requirement to look for work, because of sickness or disability.

That waste of potential is wrong economically and wrong morally.

So, with the secretary of state for work and pensions, I announced our back to work plan.

We will reform the fit note process so that treatment rather than time off becomes the default.

We will reform the work capability assessment to reflect greater flexibility and availability of homeworking after the pandemic.

And we’ll spend £1.3 billion over the next 5 years to help nearly 700,000 people with health conditions find jobs.

LCWRA element of Universal Credit (UC) from April 2024
We’ve calculated the 6.7% uprating for the LCWRA element of Universal Credit for next April as follows:

LCWRA element of UC up from £390.06 by £26.13 to £416.19

PIP rates from April 2024
We’ve calculated the 6.7% uprating for PIP for next April as follows:

Daily living standard rate up from £68.10 by £4.56 to £72.66

Daily living enhanced rate up from £101.75 by £6.82 to £108.57

Mobility standard rate up from £26.90 by £1.80 to £28.70

Mobility enhanced rate up from £71.00 by £4.76 to £75.76

Pensions triple lock maintained
The Chancellor announced that from April 24th “we will increase the full new state pension by 8.5% to £221.20 a week, worth up to £900 more a year.”

Local Housing Allowance to be unfrozen
The Chancellor announced that he will “increase the Local Housing Allowance (LHA) to the 30th percentile of local market rents.  This will give 1.6 million households an average of £800 of support.”

Benefits to be uprated by September CPI
Good news on uprating.  The chancellor has confirmed that in April 2024 benefits will be uprated by September’s Consumer Prices Index (CPI) rate of inflation, which stood at 6.7%.  There had been speculation that benefits would be uprated by the lower October rate.

Autumn statement updates
The Chancellor delivers his Autumn statement at around 12.30pm on 22 November 2023.

Benefits and Work will be providing updates on this page on how the Autumn statement affects claimants, as information becomes available.

In the meantime, heavy hints are being dropped by the government about what may be in it.

Claimants in LCWRA may have to look for work from home
A number of media outlets are suggesting that claimants who are in the Limited Capability for Work-Related Activity (LCWRA) group will be required to look for work they can do at home or lose the LCWRA element, worth £4,680 a year.

This is likely to be a follow up on the consultation on changes to the work capability assessment (WCA), which took place in September.

If this does go ahead, it is unlikely to happen before the next general election and so may be cancelled by an incoming government.

Cut in benefits uprating
Benefits are normally uprated in April by the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) rate for the previous September.

But there have been numerous suggestions that benefits may be uprated by the lower CPI rate for October 2023 of 4.7% rather than the September rate which was higher at  6.7%.

This may apply to UC and ESA but may not apply to PIP.

Back To Work Plan
We already know quite a lot about the ‘Back to Work’ plan which involves tougher sanctions and mandatory work placements for some UC claimants.  More details may be released as part of the Autumn statement.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Email Share

Joss
Current car: BMW X2 sDrive 20i M Sport 5dr Step Auto In metallic Portimão Blue. 04:10:2025
Previous car:Peugeot 308 GT Premium 1.2 Pure tech Petrol.

[Elliot]

Glos Guy wrote:

Mike 700 wrote:

The misconception here i believe is that some people seem to think that Motability Operations is owned by the Government/Taxpayer, and therefore they/ we have a say in how the business is run, whereas in truth, it is owned by four banks and it is a business, which exclusively provides services for the disabled. It is basically the delivery vehicle for the National Motability Scheme, and its performance is overseen by Motability Foundation, a charity, & Just like it is with any other business , it is prudent to make a profit , to ensure the future and to cover the present, including the unexpected! However, unlike other businesses, it has ‘some ‘ advantages regarding VAT and other business related taxes, due to it’s customer base, but it is not funded by the Taxpayer, nor does it have shareholders to distribute profits to, and nor does it have to hand profits over to Central Government to be wasted on some pet political project? But it is obliged to hand over some profit to the Motability Foundation, the Charity , which does invest some of these receipts into other charities dedicated to the disabled? The mobility portion of DLA or PiP, by agreement , is paid direct to MO to meet monthly payment costs of Contract Hiring a vehicle, therefore there is certainty of payment, eliminating the possibility of payment delinquencies, and therefore the need for credit assessment. DLA & PiP is a taxpayer funded allowance paid to qualifying individuals and is theirs to spend how they chose, whether that be in Tesco, or anywhere else in the High Street, or on a motor vehicle, maybe via Motability, or another Contract Hire or Lease provider! Would any of us truly expect Tesco to reduce prices because we chose to spend our DLA in their stores? Most of the profit is pumped back into the business, which gives the business strength and staff the ability to negotiate new car deals from that strong position, and some has been returned to us anyway – £ 750 new car payment etc. etc. Staff-As a former Manager of a team of nearly 200 staff, I would much ratgher have a top quality , highly paid and motivated team working on my behalf, rather than the opposite! I wonder how much higher AP’s would be, or how much further restrictions on available vehicles would go, if negotiations were carried out by lesser motivated negotiators, with much lower salaries?,

Absolutely no misconceptions here whatsoever Mike! I agree with almost everything that you are saying about how MO works and is financed, but I believe that there are fundamental reasons why we should not assess them in the same way as we would any other business. Whilst Motability Operations is a commercial business, it exists purely to provide a service to Motabilty the charity and, in turn, to disabled customers. They are inextricably linked. You cannot look at them in isolation as one funds the other and they Co-exist for a common purpose. They also have no competition, being in the unique position of being a monopoly and, whichever way we dress it up, they are funded by the surrendered benefits of disabled people. With all of that taken into consideration, I just feel that it is fundamentally wrong to assess them against normal business metrics. You’ve kindly shared your business experience and whilst I don’t want this to turn into ‘business experience Top Trumps’, I was a director of a very large business and, whilst I had a high salary, even at that level I did not have some of the benefits that even the most junior employees at Motabilty Operations staff enjoy. The 5,500 staff that I was ultimately responsible for certainly did not have anything remotely like the benefits package that MO staff enjoy and yet we did not have any difficulty in employing and retaining motivated employees. More importantly, we existed in a competitive commercial world! I maintain that as MO are ultimately funded by the surrendered benefits of disabled people (many of whom are on very low incomes), operate in a monopoly situation and do not have to fight for business like a normal commercial organisation does, there is no way that they should be positioning their pay and benefits in the upper quartile. I just feel that’s immoral. If the Motability market was opened up to other providers you can bet your life that a new entrant into the market would not offer remuneration packages that are anywhere near the same level and their APs could be a lot lower as a result.

Spot on.

[Glos Guy]

Mike 700 wrote:

The misconception here i believe is that some people seem to think that Motability Operations is owned by the Government/Taxpayer, and therefore they/ we have a say in how the business is run, whereas in truth, it is owned by four banks and it is a business, which exclusively provides services for the disabled. It is basically the delivery vehicle for the National Motability Scheme, and its performance is overseen by Motability Foundation, a charity, & Just like it is with any other business , it is prudent to make a profit , to ensure the future and to cover the present, including the unexpected! However, unlike other businesses, it has ‘some ‘ advantages regarding VAT and other business related taxes, due to it’s customer base, but it is not funded by the Taxpayer, nor does it have shareholders to distribute profits to, and nor does it have to hand profits over to Central Government to be wasted on some pet political project? But it is obliged to hand over some profit to the Motability Foundation, the Charity , which does invest some of these receipts into other charities dedicated to the disabled? The mobility portion of DLA or PiP, by agreement , is paid direct to MO to meet monthly payment costs of Contract Hiring a vehicle, therefore there is certainty of payment, eliminating the possibility of payment delinquencies, and therefore the need for credit assessment. DLA & PiP is a taxpayer funded allowance paid to qualifying individuals and is theirs to spend how they chose, whether that be in Tesco, or anywhere else in the High Street, or on a motor vehicle, maybe via Motability, or another Contract Hire or Lease provider! Would any of us truly expect Tesco to reduce prices because we chose to spend our DLA in their stores? Most of the profit is pumped back into the business, which gives the business strength and staff the ability to negotiate new car deals from that strong position, and some has been returned to us anyway – £ 750 new car payment etc. etc. Staff-As a former Manager of a team of nearly 200 staff, I would much ratgher have a top quality , highly paid and motivated team working on my behalf, rather than the opposite! I wonder how much higher AP’s would be, or how much further restrictions on available vehicles would go, if negotiations were carried out by lesser motivated negotiators, with much lower salaries?,

Absolutely no misconceptions here whatsoever Mike!

I agree with almost everything that you are saying about how MO works and is financed, but I believe that there are fundamental reasons why we should not assess them in the same way as we would any other business. Whilst Motability Operations is a commercial business, it exists purely to provide a service to Motabilty the charity and, in turn, to disabled customers. They are inextricably linked. You cannot look at them in isolation as one funds the other and they Co-exist for a common purpose. They also have no competition, being in the unique position of being a monopoly and, whichever way we dress it up, they are funded by the surrendered benefits of disabled people.

With all of that taken into consideration, I just feel that it is fundamentally wrong to assess them against normal business metrics. You’ve kindly shared your business experience and whilst I don’t want this to turn into ‘business experience Top Trumps’, I was a director of a very large business and, whilst I had a high salary, even at that level I did not have some of the benefits that even the most junior employees at Motabilty Operations staff enjoy. The 5,500 staff that I was ultimately responsible for certainly did not have anything remotely like the benefits package that MO staff enjoy and yet we did not have any difficulty in employing and retaining motivated employees. More importantly, we existed in a competitive commercial world!

I maintain that as MO are ultimately funded by the surrendered benefits of disabled people (many of whom are on very low incomes), operate in a monopoly situation and do not have to fight for business like a normal commercial organisation does, there is no way that they should be positioning their pay and benefits in the upper quartile. I just feel that’s immoral. If the Motability market was opened up to other providers you can bet your life that a new entrant into the market would not offer remuneration packages that are anywhere near the same level and their APs could be a lot lower as a result.

[Mike 700]

The misconception here i believe is that some people seem to think that Motability Operations is owned by the Government/Taxpayer, and therefore they/ we have a say in how the business is run, whereas in truth, it is owned by four banks and it is a business, which exclusively provides services for the disabled.

It is basically the delivery vehicle for the National Motability Scheme, and its performance is overseen by Motability Foundation, a charity, & Just like it is with any other business , it is prudent to make a profit , to ensure the future and to cover the present, including the unexpected!

However, unlike other businesses, it has ‘some ‘ advantages regarding VAT and other business related taxes, due to it’s customer base, but it is not funded by the Taxpayer, nor does it have shareholders to distribute profits to, and nor does it have to hand profits over to Central Government to be wasted on some pet political project?

But it is obliged to hand over some profit to the Motability Foundation, the Charity , which does invest some of these receipts into other charities dedicated to the disabled?

The mobility portion of DLA or PiP, by agreement , is paid direct to MO to meet monthly payment costs of Contract Hiring a vehicle, therefore there is certainty of payment, eliminating the possibility of payment delinquencies, and therefore the need for credit assessment.

DLA & PiP is a taxpayer funded allowance paid to qualifying individuals and is theirs to spend how they chose, whether that be in Tesco, or anywhere else in the High Street, or on a motor vehicle, maybe via Motability, or another Contract Hire or Lease provider!

Would any of us truly expect Tesco to reduce prices because we chose to spend our DLA in their stores?

Most of the profit is pumped back into the business, which gives the business strength and staff the ability to negotiate new car deals from that strong position, and some has been returned to us anyway – £ 750 new car payment etc. etc.

Staff-As a former Manager of a team of nearly 200 staff, I would much ratgher have a top quality , highly paid and motivated team working on my behalf, rather than the opposite!

I wonder how much higher AP’s would be, or how much further restrictions on available vehicles would go, if negotiations were carried out by lesser motivated negotiators, with much lower salaries?,

[Mm7]

If you ring pip after 11am they do pick up quicker. Dependent on if the review date is may 2024 or award end date may 2024 they may be able to extend your award.

family member is a health professional who does PIP assessments for capita and confirmed that they are assessing people who already have pip and approaching review from 2022 and new claims from July 2023.

if you are on enhanced/enhanced they may not prioritise you unless there is a change in circumstance. If so then they will send you a award review form which can taken another 2 months to complete. Your best bet would be to call DWP and explain your situation.

[ChrisK]

Just2Fish wrote:

PIP requested I submit my review application September 2022, telephone medical assessment end of August 2023, finally did a final DWP telephone assessment 11 September 2023, yes one year on, no wonder they wanted to check my submission was still relevant, but told me there and then that there was no problem, and I got my paperwork this morning, 16 September, 10 year award. I must say though that my PIP assessor lady was thoroughly pleasant as we’re the medical telephone assessors for that and ESA a fortnight earlier, but there was a lot of evidence for both reviews that my condition had worsened.

Out of interest as I‘m currently about 7 years into a 10 year award and just wonder if you were on a 10 year award before the current one was awarded?

My condition hasn’t changed so a bit different from your case but my current award was advised to the DWP by a tribunal judge so I was hoping I’d just get a “has any thing change” letter from the DWP in 3 years time. I know I’m hoping but just hoping not to be put through the mangle again.

[Just2Fish]

PIP requested I submit my review application September 2022, telephone medical assessment end of August 2023, finally did a final DWP telephone assessment 11 September 2023, yes one year on, no wonder they wanted to check my submission was still relevant, but told me there and then that there was no problem, and I got my paperwork this morning, 16 September, 10 year award. I must say though that my PIP assessor lady was thoroughly pleasant as we’re the medical telephone assessors for that and ESA a fortnight earlier, but there was a lot of evidence for both reviews that my condition had worsened.

[EK]

<p style=”text-align: left;”>

kezo wrote:

</p>

Effkay wrote:

kezo wrote:

Effkay wrote:

kezo wrote:

Am I being unfair for speaking up I would say so! In fact I would have told them to shove it where the sun don’t shine long before now Author Re

haah thanks, but to clarify, is you saying I am being unfair for speaking up? To be honest I have no option to wait as pip is up for renewal but not heard anything about an assessment yet!

OOP’s sorry my error – it came out wrong! No you are not being unfair Did you order the Bose ssetup as that maybe causing a delay?

haha! I am not sure if it is the Bose or not – looking at some other forums those who ordered tekna with bose after me have already received it. Funny is that the dealer said they are trying to speak to regional team but have had no response in a few days so not sure what the removal of the date implies!

<p style=”text-align: left;”>I wonder if @Macca can help as they have had email exchange with Nissan UK (motability) and also posted a phone number up re the same department – in the X Trail thread I think!

</p>
 

Macca wrote:

Barry is available at the Nissan HQ motability team on : motability@nissan.co.uk

 

Thanks both, I’ll drop them an email and see what they say!

[kezo]

EK wrote:

kezo wrote:

Effkay wrote:

kezo wrote:

Am I being unfair for speaking up I would say so! In fact I would have told them to shove it where the sun don’t shine long before now Author Re

haah thanks, but to clarify, is you saying I am being unfair for speaking up? To be honest I have no option to wait as pip is up for renewal but not heard anything about an assessment yet!

OOP’s sorry my error – it came out wrong! No you are not being unfair Did you order the Bose ssetup as that maybe causing a delay?

haha! I am not sure if it is the Bose or not – looking at some other forums those who ordered tekna with bose after me have already received it. Funny is that the dealer said they are trying to speak to regional team but have had no response in a few days so not sure what the removal of the date implies!

I wonder if @Macca can help as they have had email exchange with Nissan UK (motability) and also posted a phone number up re the same department – in the X Trail thread I think!

[EK]

kezo wrote:

Effkay wrote:

kezo wrote:

Am I being unfair for speaking up I would say so! In fact I would have told them to shove it where the sun don’t shine long before now Author Re

haah thanks, but to clarify, is you saying I am being unfair for speaking up? To be honest I have no option to wait as pip is up for renewal but not heard anything about an assessment yet!

OOP’s sorry my error – it came out wrong! No you are not being unfair ? Did you order the Bose ssetup as that maybe causing a delay?

haha!

I am not sure if it is the Bose or not – looking at some other forums those who ordered tekna with bose after me have already received it.

Funny is that the dealer said they are trying to speak to regional team but have had no response in a few days so not sure what the removal of the date implies!

[kezo]

EK wrote:

kezo wrote:

Am I being unfair for speaking up I would say so! In fact I would have told them to shove it where the sun don’t shine long before now Author Re

haah thanks, but to clarify, is you saying I am being unfair for speaking up? To be honest I have no option to wait as pip is up for renewal but not heard anything about an assessment yet!

OOP’s sorry my error – it came out wrong! No you are not being unfair 🙂

Did you order the Bose ssetup as that maybe causing a delay?

[EK]

kezo wrote:

Am I being unfair for speaking up I would say so! In fact I would have told them to shove it where the sun don’t shine long before now ? Author Re

haah thanks, but to clarify, is you saying I am being unfair for speaking up?

To be honest I have no option to wait as pip is up for renewal but not heard anything about an assessment yet!

[MFillingham]

Here we go again.  In order to get Higher rate PIP you have jumped through a number of hoops and will have to do so quite frequently.  The process can take over a year if you need to go all the way to tribunal and get what you need.

 

Then they’re saying percentages for mental health.  I bet they’ve simply sliced the number of claimants by each mental health without looking for comorbidities that would otherwise affect your ability to get around.  These include things like an autistic former soldier who lost limbs as part of an ied attack.

Obviously this is geared up for people to post in Motability and PIP facebook groups and to gain a lot of reads from people understanding just what they’re indignant about, plus a lot of responses on it’s own social media channels, again gaining traction and increasing sponsorship/advertising revenues.

 

My personal fear is that this further motivates DWP to be even more harsh to those going through the assessment/review process.

 

I'm Autistic, if I say something you find offensive, please let me know, I can guarantee it was unintentional.
I'll try to give my honest opinion but am always open to learning.

Mark

[Millay]

Anyone else stuck in limboland waiting for their pip to be re-assessed, My pip was up for Re-assessment in July last year, Ive just been told its still not done and they have provided me with another year extension, all very good but not enough time to apply for a motability grant and choose a car so im stuck in limbo with my current car rapidly becoming unsuitable for me. Just a mini rant to see if anyone else is int he same boat.

[jl151080]

My motability lease on my 69 plate Audi A1 S Line has been extended until December 2024, as I discussed with motability that I would probably go for another A1 but it didn’t make much financial sense at the current AP when  my current car serves my needs well and is reasonably low mileage (38,500 at present).

My PIP award is due for review in June 2024 so, as you can only order a new car when you have 12 months or more to go on your current award, I have to decide either to order a new car before the end of June, or wait until my PIP award is hopefully renewed in June next year.

Is there any benefit in choosing to order a new car now? (other than getting a new car sooner, of course!). My gut feeling is to stick with my current car until the PIP reassessment, but I’m just trying to consider all the options.

[lab]

I got my BB before being awarded DLA or PIP had an assessment arranged by county council, my wife has a BB she doesn’t claim PIP she saw what I had to go through to get DLA and doesn’t want the stress.

[RXT]

MFillingham wrote:

I can really sympathise with the DWP situation. I’ve had an assessment outside of the DWP process which gave me enhanced on both elements, was given 4 points for mobility and 8 for daily living, MR changed that to 4 and 6, meaning no daily living anymore. Appeal this week was an interesting experience, I have 11 points for daily living, 10 for mobility and was advised to enter a change of circumstances to cover my current physical abilities. My advisor said that this is standard, not many will go from having PIP taken away to double enhanced in one step and when a judge advises in a cryptic way to put int he change form, it’s just a matter of time before that becomes double enhanced, especially as I now have an advisor to ensure the form makes its case the right way from day 1. Congrats on getting the car you (kind of) want in the end. Unfortunately, dealing with the DWP seems to be an exercise in dogged determination.

Sorry to hear you’re struggling with the DWP. It can be a massive battle and if you haven’t got the time or lose the willpower to fight them, they win. The first tribunal we had I realised they don’t even send a representative. In fact if it wasn’t for the CAB writing our tribunal appeals and their legal team assessing the first tribunal response, we would definitely have lost. We did lose hope a number of times which is understandable over 2 years, but the CAB were brilliant. Fingers crossed for you ?

[MarkF]

I can really sympathise with the DWP situation.  I’ve had an assessment outside of the DWP process which gave me enhanced on both elements, was given 4 points for mobility and 8 for daily living, MR changed that to 4 and 6, meaning no daily living anymore.  Appeal this week was an interesting experience, I have 11 points for daily living, 10 for mobility and was advised to enter a change of circumstances to cover my current physical abilities.  My advisor said that this is standard, not many will go from having PIP taken away to double enhanced in one step and when a judge advises in a cryptic way to put int he change form, it’s just a matter of time before that becomes double enhanced, especially as I now have an advisor to ensure the form makes its case the right way from day 1.

Congrats on getting the car you (kind of) want in the end.  Unfortunately, dealing with the DWP seems to be an exercise in dogged determination.

[MFillingham]

I can really sympathise with the DWP situation.  I’ve had an assessment outside of the DWP process which gave me enhanced on both elements, was given 4 points for mobility and 8 for daily living, MR changed that to 4 and 6, meaning no daily living anymore.  Appeal this week was an interesting experience, I have 11 points for daily living, 10 for mobility and was advised to enter a change of circumstances to cover my current physical abilities.  My advisor said that this is standard, not many will go from having PIP taken away to double enhanced in one step and when a judge advises in a cryptic way to put int he change form, it’s just a matter of time before that becomes double enhanced, especially as I now have an advisor to ensure the form makes its case the right way from day 1.

Congrats on getting the car you (kind of) want in the end.  Unfortunately, dealing with the DWP seems to be an exercise in dogged determination.

I'm Autistic, if I say something you find offensive, please let me know, I can guarantee it was unintentional.
I'll try to give my honest opinion but am always open to learning.

Mark

[kezo]

joss wrote:

@Keso Just a quick glance at it this morning. Why what have you seen?

Some existing PIP claimants may lose their support group or LCWRA status and be transferred to the universal credit health element, where they may be required to carry out work-related activities, as early as 2026.

The government announced plans last month to axe the work capability assessment (WCA).

Under the new plans, claimants who get any element of PIP and who claim UC will automatically be eligible for an additional health element.

However, the new system will not automatically recognize any claimant as unable to carry out any work-related activities.

Instead, you may be set both voluntary and mandatory work-related requirements by a work coach and you will be subject to sanctions if you don’t meet the mandatory requirements.

When the plans were announced, the government stated that current claimants would not begin being transferred to the new system until 2029 at the earliest.

Only new claimants were said to be affected initially, with the system being rolled out by geographical area between 2026 and 2029.

However, evidence given to the commons work and pensions committee last week by the DWP contradicted this claim.

Conservative MP Nigel Mills asked: “What happens if I get a called for a new PIP assessment every couple of years and I get one of those in 2027? Does that drop me into the new rules or do I stay under the old ones?”

A senior DWP official responded:

“With the way we will roll this out, we start from 2026 with new claims only, but we will do it in a geographical, staged way. It would depend which area you were in in 2027. Yes, some people might come in under the new rules, and that means they would automatically get your UC health payment and would automatically get the support.”

Given that an increasing proportion of England and Wales, at least, will be moved onto the UC health element beginning in 2026, this would suggest that many thousands of existing PIP claimants who have a review of their award will find themselves being forced onto the UC health element earlier than 2029.

So, it looks like campaigning against the new proposals needs to start sooner rather than later, if existing claimants are to be spared the attention of work coaches with targets to meet.

Read More and Comment

 

NEWLY PUBLISHED SECRET REPORT SHOWS SANCTIONS DON’T WORK

The DWP has finally caved in to pressure and published the secret report into the effectiveness of sanctions, slipping it out hours before the country shut down for the Easter bank holiday.

It shows that sanctioned claimants take longer to move into paid employment and earn less than those who have not been sanctioned. There is no evidence that sanctions are effective in any way at all.

Overall, claimants who have been hit with a sanction have 8% shorter UC claims than claimants who were not sanctioned.

But, very concerningly, the majority of those with shortened claims disappear– they do not move into paid employment.

Claimants who are sanctioned and who eventually move into PAYE work actually take longer to do so than those were not sanctioned and earn an average of £34 a month less.

The DWP argue in a ‘context note’ released with the report that the research cannot be relied upon because it did not take into account the value of the ‘deterrent effect’ of the sanctions regime.

The theory is that claimants in general are more likely to meet their obligations because they fear being sanctioned and so, overall sanctions are an effective tool.

However, in the three years since the draft report was created the DWP have chosen not to commission any independent research to test the truth of their deterrent effect theory.

Instead they intend to introduce a much harsher sanctions regime, when the only hard evidence they have about sanctions proves that they don’t work.

Read More and Comment

 

GOVERNMENT DENIES BOTS WILL DISH OUT UC SANCTIONS

The DWP has now denied its own claims that it plans to automate the sanctions process and to allow work coaches to apply sanctions.

The DWP’s intentions were set out in a briefing paper which said that there would be “additional training for Jobcentre Work Coaches to ensure they are applying sanctions effectively” and that they would be “automating administrative elements of the sanctions process, including sending automated messages to claimants who fail to meet their Work Coach”.

The news was greeted with dismay by the PCS union, which represents DWP staff, who argued that it represented a “massive attack on claimants” and “a “computer says no culture”.

However, the DWP now claim that the only part of the process that will be automated is the sending out of a referral form to claimants who miss a mandatory appointment and that work coaches will not apply sanctions.

Benefits and Work will keep readers informed about the reality of what is actually happening with sanctions, as the truth unfolds over the coming months.

Read More and Comment

 

NEW TERMINAL ILLNESS RULES FOR PIP, DLA AND AA

New terminal illness rules for PIP, DLA and AA have now come into force, meaning that the six month rule has been replaced by a twelve month rule, in line with universal credit.

The law now says that a person with a progressive disease is considered to be terminally ill when their death as a consequence of that disease can reasonably be expected within 12 months, as opposed to 6 months.

Form DS1500 has now been replaced with form SR1.

We’ve updated the PIP, DLA and AA guides in the members area of the site to reflect the changes.

 

Read More and Comment

[joss]

From Benefit & Works web site

Published: 27 March 2023
When the government announced earlier this month that the work capability assessment was to be abolished, it might have expected there to be general rejoicing that a hated assessment system was coming to an end. Instead, the news has provoked widespread dismay.

It has even led the campaigning group, The Spartacus Network, to reform and begin work on a new report, according to the Disability News Service.

So what is it people are so concerned about?

What is replacing the WCA?
In essence, instead of an assessment that decides if you have limited capability for work or work-related activity, the DWP will only look at whether you have an award of any element of PIP. If you do, you will get an additional health element paid in your UC.

However, even if you get the health element, that will not make any difference to whether you have to carry out mandatory work-related activities. Instead, that decision will be made by a work coach. They will create a package of activities based on what they think you are capable of doing, some of which may be compulsory and some of which may be voluntary.

No-one automatically incapable of work
So, one of the biggest concerns is that no-one will be automatically protected from having to do work-related activities, including people who were previously in the support group of ESA or the UC LCWRA group and who are transferred onto UC.

So, the whole idea of some claimants being automatically protected from work-related activities will be swept way.

632,000 people in support group or LCWRA group don’t get PIP
According to the DWP’s own figures, there are 632,000 claimant who are in the support group or LCWRA group of UC but who do not get PIP or DLA. These are people who are currently judged to not be able to undertake any work-related activities but who would not get the proposed UC health element and would be obliged to look for work and bear the full brunt of an enhanced sanctions regime.

Decisions about capability made by non-medically qualified staff
Decisions about what work-related activities you can do and whether they will be voluntary or mandatory will be made by medically unqualified work coaches who may be under pressure to meet targets for job starts and sanctions.

Private sector assessors may be bad, but at least they have some medical training. Work coaches will only have the training the DWP give them.

No appeal against work coach decisions
Many more people will run the risk of being sanctioned under the UC health element proposals, because they may be subject to mandatory work-related activities. At present, you can appeal if a WCA decision is that you are capable of work-related activities. Under the new system that decision will be made by a medically unqualified work coach and you will not have the same appeal rights.

No substantial risk rule
Many people currently get UC LCWRA because it is decided that there would be a substantial risk if they were found to be able to do work-related activities. Under the new system this exemption doesn’t appear to exist, meaning that people currently protected by this rule will potentially be subject to a more severe sanctions regime.

Shorter-term conditions not covered
The qualifying conditions for PIP mean that you need to have had your difficulties with everyday activities or mobility for three months and they must be expected to last at least another nine months unless you are claiming on the grounds of terminal illness). This means that people with short-term but extremely severe illnesses will not be eligible for the UC health element. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies up to 1 million people who have short-term or fluctuating conditions could lose £350 a month as result of abolishing the WCA.

New arrivals will not be eligible
Many people who have recently arrived in the UK will not be eligible for the UC health element’ even though they may be eligible for UC itself. This is because the PIP residence and presence rules are more demanding than the habitual residence test for UC.

Trying work may seem even more risky
The white paper says that one of the main reasons for making this change is that people will no longer have to worry that if they attempt work they will lose their UC.

But, in reality, people also worry that if they attempt work they may lose their PIP.

Claimants know that that huge assumptions are made about their abilities on the flimsiest of evidence. Being able to drive a car, use public transport, keep appointments, talk to people and so on can all be used by assessors as evidence that you can carry out many PIP daily living and mobility activities.

So, by linking your PIP award to the new health element of UC, the DWP may actually make it less likely that claimants with health conditions will be willing to try working.

This is partly because a connection will have been made between your PIP award and an element of your UC award – lose PIP and you also lose your health element. But also because losing the health element will leave you open to the harshest level of sanctions under the proposed new regime.

It’s quite possible then, that the new system will have the opposite effect to the one intended. The fear that trying work may lead to the loss of your PIP, the loss of your UC health element and then a sanction on top may be a very powerful disincentive to taking even the smallest of risks.

 

Joss
Current car: BMW X2 sDrive 20i M Sport 5dr Step Auto In metallic Portimão Blue. 04:10:2025
Previous car:Peugeot 308 GT Premium 1.2 Pure tech Petrol.

[struth]

They are replacing the fitness assessment with the pip version which will probably be worse for them as it’s harder and the folk are crueller imo.

It’s not a nice thing to do to disabled folk. But typical of the Tories I’m afraid. They want the million jobs filled…as cheaply as possible

Current Car: Hyundai Kona Premium EV...2 way 40kg hoist
Last Car: Toyota C-HR Excel Hybrid...4 way 80kg hoist

[on the spectrum]

There is a very serious point here the DWP have to either come to me or do an assessment by telephone which many disabled have to do now if Motability are saying you have to get to the dealer then the Dwp could in theory cut you DLA OR PIP and ESA if you can physically do what Motability wants you to do for housebound due to mental or physical disability no one should be judging any on us which is very disturbing.

[martinod]

A friend applied for PIP last year had their phone assessment then the assessment result came in

0 points for care

0 points for mobility

they were not happy but decided not to appeal it  and wait till the new Scottish one came in (ADP)

so in july last year applied for ADP they put the exact same details on the ADP form as they put on the pip for so it was mirror copy ADP contacted their GP and specialist ect  so no face to face

their assessment result form came back this week

24 points for care so they got enhanced care

12 points for mobility  so they got enhanced mobility

they are over the moon .

well done.

it does beg the question why such a difference in points why did they get  no points on pip

how many of us are losing because of  pip doing this

 

[John Cross]

I’m on contribution based ESA.not only did I miss out on the £20 uplift payments.im also not entitled to the cost of living payments or any of the other extra payments made available to other claiments of benefits such as the cold weather payments.im 60 years of age I suffer from chronic asthma, type 2 diabetes, neuropathy,lymphadema and depression . which I receive treatment and medication for . I applied for pip payments but was turned down as I had to have my assessment interview over the phone because of the lockdown which also hindered my attempts to get medical reports to help with my pip claim as all the hospital departments I have appointments with were all closed because of the lockdown during the pandemic .I mentioned this to the assessor during my application and told them they have my permission to contact my gp and the Drs at the hospital departments that I’m under and that treat me.i still attend the appointments that were cancelled during the lockdown now that they are rescheduled as I still require treatment.but the assessment proved that they never applied for the information that they said they would.so in a nutshell I was not entitled to the cost of living payments and the £20 uplift or any of the help offered to other claiments on similar benefits.i was put on contribution based ESA not through choice.i have informed my local mp.thats as far as I can go.i will not be entitled to any form of cost of living payments past present or future.