Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
I think one of the problems is that with Incapacity Benefit and DLA many claimants ended up on benefit for years unchallenged creating a sense of entitlement.
The current system does not allow this, with periodic and regular reviews to check if conditions have improved over time with treatment.
|
An example of this was in the the recent episode of "60 Days on the Streets". A "homeless" guy on the streets of London complained that his benefits had been stopped after 20 years. Further investigation found that not only was he not homeless(home in Merseyside), he had refused on principle to attend the assessment. He complained of mobility problems, but was obviously able to get from Merseyside to the streets of London.
---------- Post added at 18:43 ---------- Previous post was at 18:36 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
Oh certainly not.
The amount of fraud and error in the benefit system is tiny, despite what certain newspapers portray. With appeals statistics as they are clearly something is wrong with the evidence gathering and application of the regulations.
|
The problem with any fraud figures is they will either refer to identified fraud or estimated. Neither of those is going to be accurate. Any identified fraud figures are not going to include those not yet identified.
How many of the 28% not upheld at the Tribunal stage are fraudulent, or are marginal cases and could have gone either way, or based upon a misunderstanding of the rules.