- This topic has 49 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Topic
I see the government are not ruling out means testing dla and pip amongst other benefits.
- Replies
I have savings over £6k, so if I lost PIP, I’d lose Motability car. The next day I’d have to use ALL more savings to buy a car. So I’d automatically be eligible for PIP. No doubt I’d have to reapply, costing DWP more money, only to end up back on PIP. A totaly waste of time with plenty of stress for me and no benefit for the DWP/tax payer.
My thinking and its often wrong, is they will set an higher level for savings hopefully.
If they don’t I will be in the same boat as you in regards to my daughters dla.
Not sure how this would work in Scotland as we have our own system up here.
The number of times I have seen posts from Tory and pro Boris voters on this forum amazed me.
Nice one @Wigwam should put a few minds at rest 🙂
Brydo If Scotland gain independance there will be no money in the pot for the likes of PIP ?
Kezo surely you will continue to bail us out.??
Kezo surely you will continue to bail us out.
Probably will!
I have savings over £6k, so if I lost PIP, I’d lose Motability car. The next day I’d have to use ALL more savings to buy a car. So I’d automatically be eligible for PIP. No doubt I’d have to reapply, costing DWP more money, only to end up back on PIP. A totaly waste of time with plenty of stress for me and no benefit for the DWP/tax payer.
I am in the same position, however, in August I reached pensionable age, I will not be eligible to make a new claim for PIP, only the means tested AA, if I am successful with an AA claim this will then be taxable?
On the plus side I will not have to worry about the high AP and lack of availability on the scheme.
Unfortunately I have suffered a brain injury and occasionally I get confused and often say the wrong thing.
There never was any question of anyone already on PIP having to make a new claim. Where did that idea come from?
There never was any question of anyone already on PIP having to make a new claim. Where did that idea come from?
If PIP became means tested if you had saving surely, you would lose your entitlement. Go back to one of your previous postings you may be right the benefit becoming taxable.
Unfortunately I have suffered a brain injury and occasionally I get confused and often say the wrong thing.
Any form of means testing would need everyone to be reassessed, which is why it can’t happen. The logistics for the government would be horrendous. The only way could be to introduce a form of means testing for new applicants. It would then not be the PIP scheme at all, but something new. That would have to get though parliament and it would not be supported by MPs. So I think we can forget about means testing.
Any form of means testing would need everyone to be reassessed, which is why it can’t happen. The logistics for the government would be horrendous. The only way could be to introduce a form of means testing for new applicants. It would then not be the PIP scheme at all, but something new. That would have to get though parliament and it would not be supported by MPs. So I think we can forget about means testing, Oscarmax.
None of really have any idea, what they are planning only the interpretation of the press, if mean testing means paying tax, then I have no problem.
Unfortunately I have suffered a brain injury and occasionally I get confused and often say the wrong thing.
Why would it be a new application.
I think more a reassessment of an existing claim.
They would have enough legal hurdles to jump to change to means testing never mind the legalities to cancel everyone’s claim and start afresh.
The DWP couldn’t find the changes, it would cost more than it saves.
Scare stories come out on purpose so when the real changes come in your relieved enough to not kick off at the real changes.
If there is to be ‘means testing’ PIP/DLA, depending on how the government implement it, could shatter Motability’s business model, or at least cause them severe headaches.
Unless there is an absolute yes/no filter which either pays the full amount of DLA/PIP or not, any ‘means testing’ could mean different claimants being paid differing amounts depending on their financial circumstances – rather as occurs with UC or Income Related ESA etc. How much you receive depends on your financial circumstances.
Thus, despite someone being awarded the High Rate/Enhanced Mobility (or/and Care) Component of PIP/DLA they may not receive the full weekly amount of the benefit.
As such, this then shatters Motability’s business model, which is based on customers all receiving the full amount of the awarded component.
If people aren’t awarded the full weekly amount, Motability have a real headache and would seriously have to look at:
Allowing only those in receipt of the full weekly Mobility component of DLA/PIP being customers of the scheme. Or
Variable advance payments based upon how much individual customers actually receive per week in order to make up the full cost of the vehicle over 3 years – ultimately this could shoot up the AP’s exponentially. Also, the administration involved in working out the individual’s AP would be a significant administrational burden on Motability. Or
Going over to a ‘with risk’ business model – i.e., a hybrid of along with the DLA/PIP component, allowing customers to ‘top up’ the weekly payments from their own funds. Again, this would have to be worked out on an individual basis and could involve some form of credit worthiness check to ensure the customer can afford their ‘portion’ of the weekly payment. This also introduces risk to the Motability business model in that a customer can simply stop paying, so this risk would need to be priced in.
A similar scenario also occurs if DLA/PIP become taxable. Although taxable benefits/allowances are usually paid without tax deducted, if the sole source of someone’s income are taxable benefits (for example, full taxable State Pension and both full components of taxable DLA/PIP) it could put someone over the current tax threshold. So, again could lead to varying DLA/PIP payments with the same problems as above. It also puts a significant administration burden (and cost) on the DWP and HMRC in taxing the benefits.
As any of these (or other viable means testing/taxing options) could cause Motability severe headaches (and loss of customers and profits), you can bet your bottom dollar they are lobbying the government behind the scenes (probably via their patrons who are usually current/ex politicians?) in order to maintain the current status quo of paying the scheme allowances both non-means tested and also tax free.
Morning @BigDave I really can’t see them means testing DLA/PIP especially this side of the GE, unless they want a death warrant. Even them I can not see it happening as there would be uproar from both sides of parliment, charities and the likes.
Morning @BigDave I really can’t see them means testing DLA/PIP especially this side of the GE, unless they want a death warrant. Even them I can not see it happening as there would be uproar from both sides of parliment, charities and the likes.
I agree with you Kezo, it would complicate things far too much and cost too much to implement. The cost/benefit analysis is off the scale!
However, politically, remember George Osborne’s ‘Austerity Budget of 2011 when he announced the abolishment of DLA for 16-65yr olds and announced PIP as a replacement, hoping to save the government money.
Despite the uproar from the disabled/disabled organisations and charities, the Opposition etc, they still got re-elected at the next General Election and PIP still went ahead (despite it not saving the government any money either in the longer term).
But it does show they can and have pulled unusual rabbits out of the hat!
Plus add in, this time, the Conservatives are pretty sure they have already lost the next election, so why not throw in a buggeration factor for disabled people.
Most non-disabled voters won’t care – they are too busy looking after themselves and by the time of the next election, it will be lost in the minds of most voters (other than those it directly affects).
I am not advocating such things, but you never know what will occur with governments at budget time.
Plus add in, this time, the Conservatives are pretty sure they have already lost the next election, so why not throw in a buggeration factor for disabled people.
This is a real danger BigDave, something I would not put past them doing along with other things. The Tories envisage they loose the GE leave the country in a mess, The blame game starts when the next party come to power, 10 or so years later the the circle complets and the blame game starts again, untill the next circle completes and so on as it has always done.
We have no idea what these muppets are capable of remember the Lettuce and her side kick a few weeks ago, all to reverse by Mr Hunt, then revised again by the current Prime Minster, they are so busy stabbing each other in the back we have no idea what will happen in the next few weeks, may be even an election, hold on for the next episode of the muppets show.
And I thought I was the one who gets easily confused ?
Unfortunately I have suffered a brain injury and occasionally I get confused and often say the wrong thing.
I would not be suprised if it becomes means tested.
The DLA to PIP was in place to get people off the benefit, mostly by moving the goal post on the “distance walked” question. This worked and MANY disabled people with mobility problems were denied the higher rate. But suddenly MANY other claimants with mental health issues became eligibe for the mobility component. I don’t know the exact figures, but I think overall, including setting up PIP and all the extra reassessments (especially those with “lifetime” awards) instead of a saving, it’s actually costing the government more now with PIP than DLA.
I’m sure that disabled benefits will be high up on the list of ways to make a saving.
Fantastic news!
official word here https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/lifestyle/money/dwp-means-testing-disability-benefits-28492655
And last week, Minister for Disabled People, Tom Pursglove said that no assessment had been made of the administrative costs of introducing a means test for disability benefits. However, in response to a query from Labour MP, Marsha De Cordova this week, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) minister has now put the matter to bed with a clear, definitive response.
Mr Pursglove said: “We [DWP] have no plans to means test Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and Personal Independence Payment (PIP).”
He explained: “Both DLA and PIP are intended to act as a contribution towards the extra costs that arise as a result of a long-term health condition, or disability, and have been n on-means tested since they were introduced”.
I was in the same situation I was letting it get to me despite Wigwam’s assurance.
Unfortunately I have suffered a brain injury and occasionally I get confused and often say the wrong thing.
The standard Modus Operandii for this bunch is, prior to a really hard hitting budget, release a bunch of really severe bad news as potential moves they’ll make, then, when the reality is announced it suddenly doesn’t sound ‘that bad’. Given this is going to have to be big in both additional taxation and cost cutting, there will be some hit pretty bad.
I’d not be sitting comfortably if I drove an EV or was middle income. those struggling will be spared as much as possible as there’s an argument for not wasting the money used to bail people out through Covid, same for small business but those of a size that could ‘survive’ a few extra hardships could find themselves with a huge target, as they couldn’t target the biggest earners too hard, that’s just not Conservative.
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
The standard Modus Operandii for this bunch is, prior to a really hard hitting budget, release a bunch of really severe bad news as potential moves they’ll make, then, when the reality is announced it suddenly doesn’t sound ‘that bad’.
That approach has been standard practice for as long as I have been following politics (well over 40 years) and is certainly not unique to Conservative governments. There is some method in it. The treasury deliberately ‘float’ a whole range of issues that are on their ‘options’ schedule to MPs, in the knowledge that they will make it into the media within hours, to see which ones land very badly (which are rarely progressed) and which go down less badly (which usually get through).
They also deliberately overstate the likely increases. That’s also clever. When it’s predicted that somethings going up 10% but actually ends up going up 5%, people tend to say “phew, it didn’t go up 10%” rather than express outrage that it’s gone up 5% (which they would have done had the 10% not been floated) ? I’m being serious by the way. It happens before every budget.
The big difference this time is that options are now extremely limited. It’s the perfect storm of a worldwide slowdown, war in Europe (with the impact on energy and food prices), raging inflation and many other issues, not to mention the residual problems following the foolhardy and totally unsustainable giveaway budget of a few months ago, even though most of it has been reversed. On top of all that, it’s also time that we have to start paying back the billions that were given away in furlough and company subsidies through the pandemic. Sadly, most of the bad news speculation about tax rises and spending cuts will become fact tomorrow. We can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.