divided our society ?

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

well no, it should be treated as is, you dont use a ak47 to kill a fly. your approach is the reason why we have vulnerable people now been turned down.

if you think its a prolific problem then prove it. otherwise it is just your point of view it is prolific. Of course when I say wrongfully turned down by that I also meant those people could wrongfully be counted as fraud depending on how they got turned down. So there will be variations both ways on the figures so best to just go on whats reported.

---------- Post added at 12:30 ---------- Previous post was at 12:26 ----------



DLA isnt a unemployment benefit it is worth noting that.

I dont think the seemingly high DLA claimant rate is anything to do with fraud but rather the assessment process. 1 in 20 people with ongoing illnesses isnt too surprising to me in itself, I am not in cloud cuckoo land where I think been ill is rare.

What about the amount of child benefit claimants? I expect that to be a very high number and that is not a problem?

Chys, DLA is not for ongoing illnesses - it is for, and I quote,

Disability Living Allowance is a tax-free benefit for disabled children and adults to help with extra costs you may have because you are disabled. It is not based on your disability but the needs arising from it.



You may get Disability Living Allowance (DLA) if:

• you have a physical disability (including a sensory disability, such as blindness) or mental disability (including learning disabilities), or both
• your disability is severe enough for you to need help caring for yourself or someone to supervise you, for your own or someone else's safety, or you have walking difficulties, or both
• you are under 65 when you claim

And I do not live in cloud cuckoo land, I just have a slight problem with the figures of 1 in 20 of the UK population fitting the above criteria.

[Chrysalis]

yeah I forget to take into account the caring element of DLA as well. As there is the care lelement and mobility element. So with that in account 1 in 20 defenitly does not seem high.

Ongoing illnesses is what they use to determine elegibility tho even tho the official guidelines state otherwise.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

yeah I forget to take into account the caring element of DLA as well. As there is the care lelement and mobility element. So with that in account 1 in 20 defenitly does not seem high.

Ongoing illnesses is what they use to determine elegibility tho even tho the official guidelines state otherwise.

Actually, the care element isn't included - if you look at my earlier post just up the page, you will see those figures are in addition, as are the 2.57 million on Employment and Support Allowance and Incapacity Benefits.

At August 2010, there were 3.18 million recipients of Disability Living Allowance (DLA), 551 thousand recipients of Carer's Allowance (CA), and 1.62 million recipients of Attendance Allowance (AA).

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

what soft approach?

there is some weird assumption been made that if claimant numbers are going up it means fraud must be going up.

i don't think it's an unreasonable assumption there is no proof either way but based on my personal experience ,people i know ,i stand by it