Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

In other words the government does not give two hoots about the rail user..

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I'm not winding anyone up. Another poster just outlined the pharmaceutical industry as one that suits being a monopoly against all the conventional wisdom. If capitalism is failing in pharma, to the cost of human lives, health and wellbeing, it begs the question where else it is failing?

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

You're not paying attention, are you?

---------- Post added at 13:41 ---------- Previous post was at 13:41 ----------

Why should people who don't use the railways pay for it?

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Why should anyone pay for anything that delivers public good through taxation? Roads, education, etc.

Privatisation to the maximum leaves everyone worse off as profits are creamed off and losses passed back to the state with the state picking up the tab anyway.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Just as unbridled Socialism, nationalising everything in sight, has worked so well in Venezuela to the total impovrishment of the people.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

tbf, that was after decades of corrupt right-wing military dictatorship, so it didn’t start off in the soundest of footings...

(I think Venezuela "Socialism" is just another chapter in the corrupt governments of that part of South/Central America, with the label changing, but corruption reigning supreme...).

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

As an economist, you should know that the benefit of privatisation is that you get major savings through being more efficient than the public sector. This allows you to make a profit as well as enable price reductions.

I have told you more than once already that it is government policy to increase rail fares to pay for the investment necessary to overcome decades of neglect by the former British Rail.

---------- Post added at 16:20 ---------- Previous post was at 16:15 ----------

The right wing government was not a good example, it is true, but the present Venezualan government has been remarkably unsuccessful at running the country on socialist lines. In fact, not a single socialist country that has abandoned capitalist ideals has ever been successful. Capitalism may not be perfect, but it has not been the utter disaster that socialism has.

I am hopeful that one day, someone will find the ideal mix of capitalism and socialism that actually works well.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I don't use schools but I expect to pay for them..

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I know, but we have all benefited from education ourselves and by educating the population they are able to use their skills to benefit the economy, from which we get the money to pay for public services. So it is not a proper comparison.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

As an economist I actually know that to be untrue.

If you can't introduce genuine competition into a market all that happens is supernormal profits enter the private sector to the harm of consumers.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I don't know which books of economic theory you have been reading, then! I have personal experience of privatising services and I can assure you that it is true. You are also ignoring the reason I gave you for fares increasing as they have.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Privatising a market that doesn’t introduce genuine competition doesn’t lower costs for consumers. It develops into oligopoly, which I’m sure you know from vast experience in the field, doesn’t drive down prices as in perfect competition.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Gas , Electricity , Water and The Railways have all gone up and in most counts it is a much worse service then before.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Yes, but on the bright side Den shareholders and directors are quids in.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Various disability charities are asking for donations to prevent the eviction of a disabled man and his six week old baby. As it is due to rent arrears (even though it is through no fault if his own) this means that his local authority would not help him as he would be classed as 'intentionally homeless':

https://www.gofundme.com/f/stop-evic...-week-old-baby

He had his ESA stopped after he missed appointments following a stroke. Due to his health, he can't claim JSA as he doesn't meet the criteria for looking for a job, so has been left virtually penniless.

In these circumstances, people can appeal (and often win), but this can take over a year. His landlord is sympathetic, but he uses the rent to pay the mortgage on the property.

Kind and generous people have now cleared his arrears, but they need a little more to pay the rent whilst the DWP sort things out.

I find it heartwarming that people can help a stranger in need, but i'm also dismayed that it has had to come to this.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Government policy is to increase fares 1% above inflation to shift more of the cost burden to passengers from general tax-payers. It's not about compensating for any previous under-investment.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

It is the previous chronic underinvestment that has created the need for a massive programme of works now.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Underinvestment that was a conscious choice of Governments that wanted to absolve itself of responsibility for it, and ignoring the value of high quality infrastructure to the economy.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Leading up to privatising nationalised industries, it was common for the Government to starve them of investment to show how much 'better' they would be in private hands.

I think that some things are better in the public sector, some the private sector and some the voluntary sector.

The railways would be better in the public sector IMO. It was one of the more complicated industries that they sold off, presumably this is why it was left until one of the last.

I used to travel regularly on the last train from Birmingham to Leeds, changing in Manchester. If the train was late, the connection in Manchester was held back. After privatisation the two seperate companies faced fines for lateness, so they didn't like to do it.

I was once completing the change and was actually shouted at to "run" and "hurry up" by the Manchester to Leeds train staff! If attempting to harass a disabled customer is supposed to be an example of improved service, come back British Rail, all is forgiven (a complaint was made and I was compensated for the humiliation).

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

That's irrelevant. It's a political decision that more of the cost of running the railways should come from rhe fare box and not general taxation.Not saying that policy is good or bad, just that that is the reason for above-inflation fare rises.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I don't disagree.

---------- Post added 24-08-2019 at 00:04 ---------- Previous post was 23-08-2019 at 23:54 ----------

How is it irrelevant? It is an explanation of why rail fares are so high.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Fresh questions arise over Atos disability assessments:

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.co...p-assessments/

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Man to take his brothers ashes to the appeal after DWP said he wasn't sick enough for PIP:

https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/29/man-t...ough-10652853/

Why on Earth wasn't his claim fast tracked under the special rules?

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

His last claim for PIP was more than a year before he died. Applied "February last year" ie 2018, died April 2019. Probably didn't notify of any change of circumstances. That's assuming he had been specifically given less than 6 months for the fast track rules to apply.

PIP isn't meant to live on as such, although people do. That is ESA.

This is what he "needed" the money for.
Link
So he wasn't given a terminal prognosis until after the PIP decision.

Wouldn't be covered by the 6 month fast track rule anyway.

Central to this case seems to be not informing the DWP of a change in circumstances. They're not mind readers.

Once the appeal process is started, you can send in new updated info/reports right up until 7 days before any tribunal hearing. The DWP reassess the decision each time.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Want to have a go at trying to justify this death?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...efits-dwp-dies

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

It's not about justifying anything, it's about FACTS. Time and time again examples are given where even the article doesn't support the claims of the headline. Eg Case of somebody dying as a result of a brain tumour which hadn't been diagnosed by anybody. Did I say anything that was incorrect and not backed up by quotes from your previous linked article?

In this case, how is dying of pneumonia directly linked to a refusal of benefits more than a year earlier?
From your link
So that would be February 2018. Some time after the failed assessment in 2017. The Liverpool Echo article is from 3rd Feb 2019. Anyone suffering from pneumonia is going to look bad at a Tribunal.

Having a medical condition isn't cut and dried as to how it's affects somebody.NHS Link
Doctors cannot really claim a patient can only walk x metres, unless the medical condition is clear cut in that. Otherwise they are just having to take the patients word on things. All that they can do is say that having the medical condition supports the possibility of any patient claim. Anybody can claim to a GP that they can't mobilize 20m. The question then becomes, do they have a medical condition that supports that? Even an ability to walk 50m or more can make you eligible for ESA and/or PIP. There are other aspects to the question for the activity. Eg The time it takes, is an often unconsidered aspect. If it takes more than twice the time than the slowest an able-bodied person can do it, then you are meant to be considered to be unable to carry out that activity. Again there has to be a medical reason for the possibility of moving that slowly and not simply out of choice.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Do you have any compassion for those who are seriously ill and debilitated who require state assistance?

Would you like to see the welfare state discontinued?

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Yes/No answer only...:dozey:

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

1) I'm providing FACTS. Strange concept to many it would seem.
2) Their grounds for eligibility are not as clear cut as they make them out to be.
3) So often in these cases any deterioration or new problems occur AFTER any assessment.

If the eligibility for fast track PIP is 6 months or less, then a prognosis of 12 months doesn't yet apply.
Also other time-related criteria apply.
I've been dealing with my own IB/ESA/DLA/PIP related issues for some time. Even managing to get through a situation where DWP said no to ESA, Tribunal also said no. Reapplied for ESA, which has been made more difficult to do. In the meantime the Upper Tribunal eventually(after a year) agreed to a rehearing where the First Tier Tribunal said yes that time. Then the DWP said no to the 2nd ESA application, but the Tribunal said yes and even the DWP conceded at the hearing. There is a way of getting around the Tribunal refusal of ESA, having to claim JSA, but not having to look for jobs.

A few years ago, in addition to my prior medical conditions, I unknowingly suffered a pulmonary embolism(blood clot to the lung). That led to heart failure when I suffered another embolism to the other lung. Spent a few weeks in hospital, and then was virtually housebound for 3 months after that. Even that wouldn't have qualified me for ESA and PIP. Luckily I was already receiving ESA and DLA.

In your recent example the leg weakness would have been from lack of use. There are leg exercises that can be done even when recovering from open heart surgery. I know that, from the leaflet about the Pulmonary Endarterectomy operation I was told I might need to have at Papworth hospital.

All in all, been there, done that. I know something of the rules, how they're not correctly applied, and how they're meant to be applied. I've done my research.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

It's a perfectly valid question as everytime someone posts something on here about something terrible that's happened to someone, up to and including death, an attempt is made to justify it, whilst others are rightfully dismayed and shocked.

Whilst I wouldn't agree with it, some people do genuinely believe that the welfare state should be abolished and that people should be self reliant. From a personal point of view this would benefit me if it was used to cut taxes even further, but I believe that a civilised society should be judged upon how they treat their most vulnerable.

Much of social security law is left to decision makers to judge what is 'reasonable' or 'appropriate' in given circumstances as it was recognised that people have more complicated lives and circumstances. To help them do this, they use information from various sources, including case law and manuals on policy, procedure and guidance.

Since Cameron introduced his 'Stricter Benefits Regime", the ethos of the DWP being there to help and support those in difficulties and being flexible in their approach to reflect the wide variety of circumstances that people find themselves in has gone out of the window.

Targets to sanction claimants for the most spurious of reasons are now routinely deployed (often with staff under threat of disciplinary action if they don't) and are affecting decent people, many of whom honoured their side of the bargain by paying all taxes and National Insurance contributions when due.

The robotic approach by nomadking entirely reflects the new approach to decision making since 2010, which has resulted in cases like the army veteran being found dead due to malnutrition and the huge number of cases being successful after appealing as the Appeals Service tend to look at matters with compassion and reasonableness.

Sadly, because of the backlog of appeals, this is all too often too late as the people involved are already dead.

Thousands upon thousands of people have died due to this cruel administration; surely no right thinking person can agree with this.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

The point is that the stories are fake news. Somebody has to question and investigate the garbage coming from the media.

No point griping somebody doesn't have any money, when they do. At best, these are borderline cases as to whether they qualify. Most of the rules that don't apply to them have been in place in way or another for a very long time(before 2013).

Sanctions existed long before 2010. If somebody decides not to go to multiple appointments, then sanctions have always been there.

From your post #2331
Link
Housing benefit is paid on the basis of income, not receipt of benefits. He would still have been eligible for having zero income. Again been there, done that.

Are Maximus/DWP expected to be mind-readers? Who was keeping an eye on all the other potential bills etc to be paid?

Not quite true. On the one hand he could've reapplied for ESA for the new problems, on the other you can claim JSA and not have to look for work for up to 3 months using the Extended Period of Sickness rule as long as you can get the "fit" notes.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Are you claiming that things have not changed for the worse, particularly for sick and disabled people since Cameron introduced his Stricter Benefits regime?

Are you claiming that Atos are fit for purpose?

Are you claiming that thousands upon thousands of people haven't lost their lives as a result of these deliberate policies?

As we've been through before, sanctions did exist prior to this and they can be useful & appropriate to ensure compliance, but how things stand today is frankly absurd.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

The side of the bargain isn’t to pay tax and NI, it’s to spend 35 hours a week looking for work.

If you can’t spend 35 hours looking for work when do claimants intend to work if they don’t have the time?

Jobseekers Allowance wasn’t fit for purpose. Fire off three CVs a week and get your dole. No wonder a dose of reality was a shock to the system for layabouts.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

"thousands upon thousands"? Another example of fake news and nonsense.

Headline
Dad cries moment before suicide after Universal Credit wait left him with £4.61
But then actually read and comprehend the story.
That much debt in less than 5 weeks?
One way or another he would've had a month's worth of money to last those 5 weeks.
Eviction notice in the space of less than 5 weeks? Unless they're just talking about a notice to quit.

There have always been delays in starting benefits. It can't be an instant thing.


All in all, nothing whatsoever to do with Universal Credit and any benefits. Yet that is what is claimed in the headline. Have I said anything that isn't true?



All too often look behind the headlines and a very different picture emerges.

---------- Post added at 20:27 ---------- Previous post was at 20:20 ----------

The problem is that there isn't always enough than can be done to fill 35 hours/week. Once you've checked new vacancies for the day/week, there isn't much time needed to apply for any.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Training, volunteering, improving skills? There's plenty that can be done by the person genuinely seeking work.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

A quick search on the internet shows that over 17,000 people have died through PIP alone. The DWP have tried every trick in the book to prevent figures from being released.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8727296.html

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Died from what though? People will have also died after actually receiving PIP, so meaningless figures as usual.From your Link.
So not turned down, Your claim was that is was a deliberate policy of refusal causing those deaths. As I said, FAKE NEWS,

And so likely to die anyway in the near future.

PIP is an ADDITIONAL benefit, not supposed to be money people rely on for food etc. Decisions on DLA or PIP have never been quick, apart from the 6 month terminal prognosis fast track. You are otherwise meant to have had the problems for at least 3 months before any claim starts. Although you can start the claim before, it won't apply until after the 3 months is up.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Many people do genuinely believe that the situation is now so serious, that it is a deliberate form of genocide with regards to disabled people.

The DWP have done everything that they can to prevant access to data to support or deny this claim.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Now you are just being provocative. :dozey:

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

No, it is a statement of fact. It's not like you not to frantically search the internet, take a look.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Paying 6 million people some form of illness or disability related support payment, as well as 2.9 million people being paid Carers or Attendance Allownace, is a strange form of "genocide’.

You made the provocative statement, you back it up - I’m not doing your work for you...

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

The data simply isn't there in the first place. They are not going to record cause of death etc. It was never there before 2010, so you could just as easily ask "what were Labour hiding"? Even if they did record cause of death, it would be meaningless.

I could just as easily ask put in a Freedom of Information request asking "how many people die within 6 years of a Labour council being elected". Seeing as it is forever being claimed that people in better off areas, live longer and tend to vote Conservative. I could claim proof that having a Labour Council kills people. The death rates in the Labour council areas will tend to be higher.

I could claim that the SNP is killing people.
Link
The evidence is all there, isn't it?:rolleyes:

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Some interesting reading on the DWP deaths:

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.co...p-stays-silent

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

So still not "thousands upon thousands", which was your claim.
From your link.
People constantly complain about one decision affecting another, and are now in favour of it?
If a PIP decision is made for 5 years and an ESA one for 2 years, what happens when the 2 years is up? If it's such an obvious change, when didn't Labour introduce it. The same situation would've occurred prior to 2010, yet nobody complains about that.



There are regular independent reviews as to whether the decision making is being done correctly and in the best way, and what changes might be made. Not sure one way or the other about more recent reviews and their suggestions, but the earlier advice was followed by the DWP where possible.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

There have been thousands of deaths.

https://welfareweekly.com/dwp-forced...enefit-deaths/

If they have nothing to hide, why won't they collect and publish details of how these people died? Only one death due to the benefit reforms would be unacceptable.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Where are the figures for 2010 and before? They don't exist.

Of course the claims were closed, they had died.:rolleyes: What is meant to be shocking about that?

The fact they they are on the DWP system as having died, PROVES they were receiving benefits at the time. They wouldn't have any record of it otherwise. Those 111,450 were receiving ESA at the time. Eg from your link, 82,680 were even in the support group. What is there to complain about?

You could just as easily argue those 111,450 died BECAUSE they received ESA.

You chose a ludicrous article. ALL of them were receiving benefits, and NONE of them had been denied benefits.
This is the question the DWP responded to.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

While I agree with what you are saying I think that's the wrong way to put the bolded sentence.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Yes it is, as the claim was that the benefits system was responsible for their deaths.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I'm talking about you saying about cancer patients are likely to die in the near future. That's a pretty horrible thing to say.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Utter garbage.
It was this claim I was responding to.
If 1 in 4 of those had cancer, then that 17,000 figure doesn't represent anything.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

You said - "And so likely to die anyway in the near future." In reply to this - "One in four (4,330) of those who died were suffering from a form of cancer"

That's a horrible thing to say about people with cancer, especially when a lot often survive for years anyway.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Those terminally ill and expected to die within 6 months get processed under "special rules". The DWP have a ridiculously tight turnaround time on these - something like 2 weeks. It's unlikely those account for a significant proportion of those who pass away waiting for a decision.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Hopefully, this might be a start to preventung future deaths, but don't hold your breath.

https://thepoorsideof.life/

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

A man left a suicide note blaming the DWP for his suicide and it is still trying to evade responsibility:

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2019/...esponsibility/

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

But you must surely acknowledge that people can say a lot of things which are untrue or unfair when their balance of mind is disturbed. I'm not saying that this was the case here, but just because a statement is made in a suicide note it doesn't necessarily mean it is true. If the DWP is challenging it, then clearly there is more to this story than meets the eye.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

If a Government department is challenging something that would cause them huge reputational damage, there has to be more than meets the eye?

You've jumped the shark, Old Boy. A parody of your former self.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

There is no point in challenging something if it is obvious it will go against you. They must have evidence to support their case, or there wouldn't be a case.

One thing stuck out in that hysterical press item. He was ordered to attend a work capability assessment and refused.

Not the best way of getting your payments reassessed, I would have thought.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Hillsborough? Bloody Sunday? Met police and the Steven Lawrence murder?

Successive UK Governments have a history of knowing that the 'little guy' of limited means can be ground down by denial after denial, with limited recourse through the legal system, often taking decades.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

His active choice.
Link
The note had been written in the summer yet:-

In the recent Ed Stafford homeless documentary, somebody complained that they stopped his benefits, when he admitted that it was because he had refused a DLA/PIP assessment. He left a home(still probably empty) on Merseyside, to go to London because begging on the streets of London was more lucrative. His complaint about the required assessment was that he needed it at home in Merseyside. If he could travel to and around London, then he could easily travelled to an assessment centre.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Nice strategy, deflect from the case at hand onto another one that it's easier to defend the position of the DWP.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Did I say anything that wasn't true? I found other link(s) to the story. The Ed Stafford story was connected, as the person had refused to attend an examination, when they were perfectly able to do so.


Any story/post that includes the following is utter garbage.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Disabled people are amongst those more likely to be sanctioned, some advice here for those who are affected:

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/b...s-cuts-3382555

---------- Post added at 19:56 ---------- Previous post was at 19:53 ----------

More evidence of the sloppy way that Universal Credit is being processed by the DWP, leading to both under and overpayments:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...rrors-20524454

---------- Post added at 20:03 ---------- Previous post was at 19:56 ----------

Further evidence of the new culture at the DWP, I suspect that this is caused by cuts to staffing levels and the vast amount of professional & experienced staff that have left or been made redundant:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...aking-20468965

Disabled people are accused of "faking it", it is suggested that other claimants should be "rounded up and a grenade thrown into them", that they have "no time" for those who "have anxiety or depression" or who "whinge" despite "getting something for nothing".

These attitudes are often cascaded downwards from the top, starting with Camerons Government.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

It's the way this country is going unfortunately Richard. The rate of successful PIP appeals (70%) is evidence of the Govts corruption. What's devastating is those that are entitled but don't appeal, convinced the 'authorities' must be right. A sick country.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

The rate of successful PIP appeals (70%) tell you that the assessment process is deeply flawed that is for sure.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Some good news about one of the baseless assumptions that the so called 'healthcare professionals' have been making about people in pain to deny their entitlement to benefits:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...P5mXRA_1NHQeXA

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Or evidence 30% were unworthy claims,and the government has saved the taxpayer a fortune.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Not really all these appeals/ tribunals are costing more than they're saving. Costs have gone up 20% since PIP introduction !
https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/ne...nstead-of-down

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Dying man told to get a job by DWP:

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2019/...-any-benefits/

Terminally ill woman has her PIP stopped because she isn't dying fast enough:

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2019/...g-fast-enough/

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Hmm.

It would be great to see a full and impartial presentation of the facts of both those cases, without the accompanying value judgments (the DWP and its agents might be harsh and bureaucratic but are they really trying to speed people to their graves? Really?).

I don’t think a balanced treatment of anything is likely to arise from that website.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

And is this any different to the rules before 2010?

The criteria of not being able to do your normal job went a long time ago.
Link
Sounds like he didn't make the required NI contributions to qualify for contribution based ESA, which I think doesn't have other financial criteria.

If you qualify for DLA/PIP under special rules which override the normal criteria of your activities being badly affected, and those special rules no longer apply to you, then you no longer qualify unless the normal criteria apply. If they do, she can apply for PIP and be assessed in the normal way.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

That’s not a zero sum game. It’s possible to get more of them right first time without paying the 30%.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I have not had to use the system, so I am not really in a position to comment on its effectiveness. I certainly do believe that it is the charlatans who are out to defraud that system who are responsible for the rigidity of the application of the legislation.

Although some may highlight the problems that certain individuals have experienced, there is much more of a story than immediately meets the eye in many of these cases. It our right, an absolutely right, to require that the claims made to justify benefits are properly scrutinised. After all, these people are benefiting from the taxes of hard working families, and it is not surprising that they resent subsidising the layabouts and fraudsters who are seeking to take advantage.

I want the authorities to come down very hard on them whilst protecting those whose claims are justified. I am more than a little disturbed by some of the reports I am picking up of claimants who are put through unreasonable medical examinations or other justifications to prove what should be obvious. That is where we should be looking to improve the system.

It is unfortunate indeed that there are people out there, more than many realise, who are quite happy to behave in this fraudelent way, thus ensuring that those who are genuinely in need are required to jump through hoops to justify their eligibility.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

The Government, and only the Government are responsible for the primary legislation that enacts benefits and the secondary legislation that underpins qualification criteria. To describe those legitimately entitled, made to jump through hoops, as if they are somehow collateral damage is quite insulting. The rules aren't being "rigidly applied" if they are getting overturned 70% of the time at tribunal - they're being incorrectly applied.

Getting decisions right first time saves money in the long run.

There's plenty of tax avoidance/evasion and I see little effort to close the loopholes and cause difficulties for those gaming the system at the other end.

I see the "hard working families" have been invoked. Many of the benefit claimants were hard working taxpayers before their circumstances changed. Which is the whole point of a social security system.

Of course an arch-capitalist like yourself would probably prefer to see an American system of welfare.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

There are stronger painkillers that aren't opiates, eg Nefopam.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I believe the rigidness isn't down to fraud but just cost cutting. The actual fraud rate for sickness benefits are really low. It is now down to evidence and the medical which can't be easy to defraud.

I have to agree with jfman, you seem to bare a grudge when it comes to benefits just because you don't need it. I'm sure all your opinions would change if you did need it at some point.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

What an incredibly naive post. Readers will make of that nonsense what they will.

Clearly, you do not care how many people are deliberately abusing the system.

---------- Post added at 02:45 ---------- Previous post was at 02:38 ----------

I have never said that. What I believe is that the system should be managed appropriately so that those who are meant to receive the benefit actually get it. If there are faults in the system, these need to be addressed.

You may not care if fraudsters get the benefit, but this is my money, and I do care. The system needs checks. Too many people who should not be receiving taxpayers' money are getting it. Are you saying that we should ignore this? Incredible!

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

A typical response from you again. Saying I don't care if fraudsters get the benefit and I should ignore it.... Please feel free to quote where I said this... Oh you can't.... Now that's incredible.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Absolute nonsense Old Boy. 3am on a Saturday night I can only assume you were drunk when you posted this, and I’ll happily accept a retraction this morning.

The instances of benefit fraud is less than 1% according to the DWPs own figures. Hundreds of thousands of people are going through demeaning processes, incorrectly applying the DWPs own rules in the basis of weak evidence, consistently overturned at Tribunals.

“If there are faults in the system”? I can’t decide what’s more astonishing your complete ignorance or your complete arrogance.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Using fraud figures is meaningless, of course. Can be difficult to find and prove. If somebody commits fraud using your bank account, usually you will notice it. The difference with benefit fraud is that it can be less obvious and noticeable and go undetected, sometimes for more than ten years.


You only have to look at some of the Upper Tribunal decisions, some of which are published, to see people trying it on.
Eg Guy with, according to the specialists, very minor problem to his shoulder, complaining that he is afraid to go out unaccompanied for being afraid of being attacked because of the minor problems in that one arm. He's ok, if his wife is there to defend him.:rolleyes: Do you buy that?
Eg Somebody had claimed and received the maximum £1,000 in Housing Benefit, when his actual rent was about a quarter of that.:shocked: £750 a time(each week?, after all we're talking Islington) in his pocket. His excuse was some unspecified person told him he could do that. He won a rehearing at another First Tier Tribunal.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

If the DWP aren’t applying the law correctly they’ll lose at Tribunals. Especially the Upper Tier - I don’t accept that your one line summaries of these cases are accurate reflections of reality.

As First Tier Tribunal decisions aren’t published I’m interested in how you know the facts of the second case. Do you work for DWP? If so, you should consider the Civil Service Code and reputational risk to the Department by your attitude towards benefit claimants in general exhibited on this forum.

If you heard it from a “man in the pub” that probably says all we need to know.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Despite the checks fraudsters still get through the net.

'Disabled' woman, 50, who said she was a single mother and 'too ill to work' while claiming £260,000 of benefits was caught living with her partner and dancing at a wedding

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-partner.html

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Which is a separate issue to 70% of appeals being lost at PIP tribunals. They're losing appeals because of bad decision making and poor quality medical evidence being used.

Resourced more appropriately, with better decision making, would reduce the amount of time spent on the administration of appeals and free up resource to investigate genuine fraud.

In the case you link no number of assessments, being found fit for work, appeals, etc would establish she was living with a partner. Nor would it establish this part:

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Here is the official public link to selected upper tribunal decisions. Not all of them are published, and they are relatively anonymised, eg Mr X. They include details about the appellants claim and the First Tier Tribunals reasoning etc. It is only when an issue is raised that is thought to be of general importance that it may be published.

The older(2015 and before) ones are on a different link and in a different format.
Here is the link to the 2nd quoted decision CH/3295/2012
A rehearing ordered by the Upper Tribunal is not necessarily a sign that the claimant has "won". It can simply be that it was felt that the First Tier Tribunal hadn't explained or explored their reasoning in a sufficient manner. The principal being that the claimant has to have had a "reasoned judgment", so that even if they don't agree with it, they should know why. That is in the DWP rules, and even at the European Convention of Human Rights level(Article 6).

Can't remember any more specific details about the shoulder case to track it down, again. The 2nd case was easier as there was only one listed case of HB overpayment for Islington, and I had remembered that it was for Islington.


Too many of the cases referred to in this thread, can be quickly found to be not what they claim to be. Eg ESA refused, but claimant has died of a previously undiagnosed condition(brain cancer), yet the DWP is still blamed. Recent example of somebody with cancer being denied UC/ESA, when upon proper inspection of the article from the Daily Mirror, it was because they had a partner who was working. The cancer didn't come into it, yet it was claimed it was. Another classic, is the claim that over 100,000 had died as a result of DWP decisions. When looking at the original question asked of the DWP, it was merely the number of people who had died whilst receiving benefits in that time period. Bit like asking how many Labour Party members have died since Corbyn took over as leader, and blaming their deaths on him. Just ridiculous.


All too often, the headline deliberately misrepresents the detail of the article. Certain people readily buy into the headline, without reading and comprehending the details in the article. The truth is usually there for all to see.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

You said in the housing benefit case they won a subsequent FTT? Is there a link to that? Those aren’t routinely published.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Those who cheat the system should have the book thrown at them of that there is no doubt but this article is a clear example of a flawed system which has ended up costing the taxpayer more in the end.

Its no surprise that 70% of original decisions are overturned on appeal as its not rocket science to realise there are considerable flaws in the system currently.

Statistics don't lie as they say.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news...sions-17069886

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

You make a good case for more vigorous assessments, digging deeper into peoples bank accounts/ property ownership/living status.......

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I make a case for better quality assessments/alternative forms of medical evidence from medical professionals. Not these slapstick copy and paste jobs served up by Atos/Capita/Maximus.

I’ve no issues at all with ploughing resource into genuine counter fraud work. Land registry data, credit referencing, etc.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

The DWP can do any of that now if there is a suspicion that someone is defrauding the system.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

Perhaps I didn't explain it properly. The Upper Tribunal decided that the claimant was to have a rehearing, ie a 2nd First Tier Tribunal hearing. I have no idea how that rehearing went, although the First Tier Tribunal hearings are theoretically open to the public to attend. The issue wasn't what any final decision was, but what the claimants were trying to get away with claiming.


This is the normal type of explanation of the Upper Tribunal decision.

Quote:

The Upper Tribunal is not in a position to re-decide the appeal. It therefore refers the appeal to be decided afresh by a completely differently constituted First-tier Tribunal and in accordance with the Directions set out below.

---------- Post added at 11:39 ---------- Previous post was at 11:30 ----------

What do you mean by medical evidence? The problem is that the "evidence" is all too often just what the claimant has said, without any possibility of proving or disproving it. The new non-disprovable "back pain" type things are things like anxiety, depression, and agoraphobia. How does a GP prove or disprove any of those? They have to accept what the patient says, without question. That is the opposite to the approach the DWP etc has to take.



The single person claiming when there is somebody else living there, can be a new situation that can arise. The signs can be difficult to find without a very deep financial investigation into things like bank accounts. Not sure they should be constantly monitoring bank accounts for inconsistencies.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

There's plenty of plumbers, taxi drivers and carpet fitters out there doing a ton of work for £10 000 a year as well, equally a preposterous notion and costing genuine taxpayers who are left footing the bill for public services.

---------- Post added at 11:57 ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 ----------

Evidence from a medical professional is medical evidence.

Are you claiming that all of the above conditions are easily faked to the point GPs prescribe medication, refer to specialists, etc.

I think not.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

So what irrefutable medical tests are there?
Link
Link
Link

Link
More than 10 years of it going on without being caught and being in any fraud figures.



Link
Link listing several cases

In at least some cases, a claim that has been refused, will have been an attempted fraud but won't be in any fraud figures.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

You still haven't demonstrated that incorrectly refusing PIP claims and losing 70% of appeals reduces said fraud. All it does is increase the administrative burden and cost of the application process.

It's also unclear what, if any, evidence the DWP used in making the decisions mentioned above. Some of them will almost certainly have gamed the entirely inadequate PIP/ESA assessment process.

The reality is it has little credibility at tribunal, making it easier for fraudsters not harder. The copy and paste private sector reports carry little weight in the absence of any genuine insight into the person being assessed.

Not acting aggressively to the assessor and adequate eye contact is no measure of a whole raft of mental health issues. Yet the DWP will copy and paste it over and over.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

If only the Govt. were as proactive in making sure those that are entitled to benefits get them. The whole farce around PIP a s to try and disuade those who are entitled from claiming or appealing. As they are vulnerable anyway, they're an easy target. Same with Pension credit, massively underclaimed. The fraud rate in comparison is miniscule.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

If the cases that get put in this thread as being slam dunk ones of being eligible, are anything to go by, then 99% of accepted claims are bogus. That isn't the case, but it still remains a fact that the cases in this thread are not what they seem, and that is what I keep highlighting.

Eg Link
Head of story
If you look further on in the story, then you find that the bit in bold never happened. He was diagnosed in July, and therefore wouldn't have been time to go through all the assessment and appeal stages. Eventually the story explains the truth, which contradicts the headline and tone of the article.
Eventually you get to the end of the story to be told.
Eg Link
I pointed out that the what should be obvious fact that the claims were closed because they had died, not the other way around. They were still receiving benefits at the time of death.
They hadn't been turned down for benefits, as it was meant to be incorrectly inferred.

Headline
Dad cries moment before suicide after Universal Credit wait left him with £4.61
Yet look further into the same story.
That much debt in less than 5 weeks?
Eviction notice in the space of less than 5 weeks?

The watch the TV programmes complaining about UC.
Eg Person complaining about UC, answering the front door to bailiffs seeking money for Water charges, which is twice yearly bill(ie must have had more than 6 months to save up for it), with iPhone clapped to her ear.
Person complaining about DLA/PIP assessments, refused to have one, but managed to travel all the way from Merseyside to the streets of London, to become a fake homeless beggar because he earned more money that way.:rolleyes:

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I’m quite sure the £20 000 of debt individual had wider issues, but being unable to keep up repayments (which benefit delays exacerbate). I’m not sure why you appear to be implying he’s any less worthy of sympathy/benefit because he’s in debt.

He’s exactly the sort of individual that “the system” be it regulation of lenders or social security ought to protect. Now we’ve a family with no father although I suspect many on this forum have more sympathy for the accountant writing off bad debt.

All of these stories you are spinning are a tiny amount of all claims. You may say “these are only the ones we hear about” but I suspect there’s a huge PR machine that goes into releasing these stories to demonise claimants.

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

The point is that UC was blamed, when it wasn't to blame if anybody actually bothered to read and comprehend the full article.
That just isn't true. We don't know how long he had been waiting for anything, at that stage.
Has access to benefits ever been that instant?
The eviction notice will have been planned before applying for UC. Even if he had instantly been given UC, it would have made little difference.

Xmas had been 3 months beforehand. So severe issues by then.


I'm not claiming that these stories represent the bigger picture. It is the people who are posting these stories that are doing that. They are posting them as a "typical example".

Re: The state benefits system mega-thread.
 

I have just sent off my ESA form and it was a fairly long form. Now to wait and see what happens.

Have to say though, having been on UC for the last 2 months it really has been a horrible experience and I would not want my worst enemy to go through it. Barely enough money to pay 2/3 of our rent. ESA gets deducted from it too and then ESA is every two weeks. So paying bills has been tough.