Cameron suggests cutting housing benefit

[pauldominic]

I'm an unusual case.

Stop right there

What was your best subject at school EJ?

I reckon you're a prop forward for sale at the moment.

 

[mackenzie]

Fantastic post Rascal.
The invisible nature of some of the most severe symptoms of illness makes it impossible for anyone but a well trained specialist to have any clue about someones ability to work.
Just how many people does an ill/disabled claimant have to give their medical history to. Those who've been shifted into looking for work will have told a UK doctor, the dwp, an 'assessor', the person at the jobshop and then some failed salesman with powerpoint employed by private contractors to 'ge Britain working'.
How many times can you tell someone you could wet yourself at any minute before the depression finally wins.

If they must assess people, do it fuckin properly. Get a real doctor, specialists in their fields, shrinks and someone from the social. All in the same room at the same time.

Because stoner, unfortunately, it's all about targets these days.

No government of the last few decades at least has the remotest interest in being 'fair.'

Tell me about it...

There may also be a practical reason for them to get it right the first time. It could cost less. The current system is collapsing under the weight of appeals. The admin trail goes on and on and round and round. Computers spew out wrong letters, people jump on the phones.
None of this can be cheap? There's probably some consultancy doing a study right now that'll cost a bomb and end up in the bin.


(oh fuck, that last sentence might set some alarms off at GCHQ)

The computer produced letters ARE being reviewed I believe, and not before time. Probably a consultancy though as you say :-(

It's demoralising and crazy. There have been some improvements over the years but it's got to the point where I feel jaded.

 

[Dirty Harry]

It's demoralising and crazy. There have been some improvements over the years but it's got to the point where I feel jaded.

After 31 years of it you're probably not right in the head either ;-) just like the M-I-L

 

[metalblue]

Whilst both yours and others posts have shown up the inadequacies of the system, surely you recognise that there can't be millions of people completely incapable of some type of work?

Completely incapable is the moot point of course. I would say personally very few are completely incapable and that includes me.

However take into account the nature of peoples illnesses/disabilitis and the sheer impractibilty of work becomes apparent. I will give me as an example.

You have seen me over the years, have a beer, have a laugh, walk pretty ok, be clear of mind and appear quite able. But and the big but is that is only when you see me. You dont see me other days when say this sunday i had to go to bed at 2pm in the afternoon because i was that tired, in so much pain it was the only way i could get any comfort.

Now as an employer, would they really want a person who is so unreliable he does not even know himself how he will feel the next day, does that employer want me who has spent 50 days this year already in hospital and visits hospital weekly for treatment.

Now im a bright lad, i have a degree, im fairly worldywise etc and have worked when able, i would work if i could, but as far as i am aware the job that pays you to turn up when you can and do what hours you can simply does not exist.

Again this i feel is the nature of many problems. There is a complete and total misunderstanding of how illness/disabilty affects a persons life.

Yes Rasc, I have seen you on your 'better' days over the years and fully understand how debilitating your illness must be. I have nothing but admiration for the way you struggle on, through the pain, for a life worth living.

The crux of the matter is that there are many that do not have the degree of illness/disability that you have. Not by a long way.

These are the ones that they are out to get and, like any political party, they pander to the voters and everyone gets caught up in the net.

Mac you are obviously in a more advantageous position than many on this one so will be interested in hearing your thoughts on mine.

Whilst I have no doubt there are a number of bogus recipients how endemic is it? I had a look at some stats showing at introduction 1.1m claimed DLA and now it's a touch over 3m - a huge increase we will all agree...but is it? You are not eligible to file a new claim for DLA after 65 but if you claimed before you keep (therefore by now the "benefit" is catching a much wider group than initially); add to that the uptake in the early years as people became aware of the benefit plus those "released" from long-term "hospital" stays and we see the year-on-year increase at around 4% doesn't strike me of a system that is being systematically abused. It's also worth mentioning that DLA isn't an "out of work" benefit, it's for those that work as well, so comparing outward symptoms may not necessarily be a good indicator in this case.

Now DLA itself is designed to help with the extra cost of living for those that have a disability therefore I would have thought a reasonable "test" to eligibility would be a combination of a doctor/consultants diagnosis coupled with a demonstration from the recipient that they have "used" extra support (be that external or family support). The next issue I find discomfort with is the continuation of benefit if you claimed prior to 65 or not, now as a country we either provide the necessay access to the right type of support for the older (>65) population with disabilities or we don't...if we do then the benefit should stop at 65 if we don't then we either need to stop it or remove the upper age limit for new claims...there can be no evidence to support the current appearance of "inbalance".

@Harry, PD, malg and Rascal - Thanks for responses...I am shocked at involvement of a private company like ATOS in all this - I have no ideological reason for disliking private companies doing government work - but the methods and potential for conflict of interest look, at the least, suspect. This needs a thorough independent review.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

Completely incapable is the moot point of course. I would say personally very few are completely incapable and that includes me.

However take into account the nature of peoples illnesses/disabilitis and the sheer impractibilty of work becomes apparent. I will give me as an example.

You have seen me over the years, have a beer, have a laugh, walk pretty ok, be clear of mind and appear quite able. But and the big but is that is only when you see me. You dont see me other days when say this sunday i had to go to bed at 2pm in the afternoon because i was that tired, in so much pain it was the only way i could get any comfort.

Now as an employer, would they really want a person who is so unreliable he does not even know himself how he will feel the next day, does that employer want me who has spent 50 days this year already in hospital and visits hospital weekly for treatment.

Now im a bright lad, i have a degree, im fairly worldywise etc and have worked when able, i would work if i could, but as far as i am aware the job that pays you to turn up when you can and do what hours you can simply does not exist.

Again this i feel is the nature of many problems. There is a complete and total misunderstanding of how illness/disabilty affects a persons life.

Yes Rasc, I have seen you on your 'better' days over the years and fully understand how debilitating your illness must be. I have nothing but admiration for the way you struggle on, through the pain, for a life worth living.

The crux of the matter is that there are many that do not have the degree of illness/disability that you have. Not by a long way.

These are the ones that they are out to get and, like any political party, they pander to the voters and everyone gets caught up in the net.

Mac you are obviously in a more advantageous position than many on this one so will be interested in hearing your thoughts on mine.

Whilst I have no doubt there are a number of bogus recipients how endemic is it? I had a look at some stats showing at introduction 1.1m claimed DLA and now it's a touch over 3m - a huge increase we will all agree...but is it? You are not eligible to file a new claim for DLA after 65 but if you claimed before you keep (therefore by now the "benefit" is catching a much wider group than initially); add to that the uptake in the early years as people became aware of the benefit plus those "released" from long-term "hospital" stays and we see the year-on-year increase at around 4% doesn't strike me of a system that is being systematically abused. It's also worth mentioning that DLA isn't an "out of work" benefit, it's for those that work as well, so comparing outward symptoms may not necessarily be a good indicator in this case.

Now DLA itself is designed to help with the extra cost of living for those that have a disability therefore I would have thought a reasonable "test" to eligibility would be a combination of a doctor/consultants diagnosis coupled with a demonstration from the recipient that they have "used" extra support (be that external or family support). The next issue I find discomfort with is the continuation of benefit if you claimed prior to 65 or not, now as a country we either provide the necessay access to the right type of support for the older (>65) population with disabilities or we don't...if we do then the benefit should stop at 65 if we don't then we either need to stop it or remove the upper age limit for new claims...there can be no evidence to support the current appearance of "inbalance".

@Harry, PD, malg and Rascal - Thanks for responses...I am shocked at involvement of a private company like ATOS in all this - I have no ideological reason for disliking private companies doing government work - but the methods and potential for conflict of interest look, at the least, suspect. This needs a thorough independent review.

Good post.

 

[Dirty Harry]

@Harry, PD, malg and Rascal - Thanks for responses...I am shocked at involvement of a private company like ATOS in all this - I have no ideological reason for disliking private companies doing government work - but the methods and potential for conflict of interest look, at the least, suspect. This needs a thorough independent review.

There's an independent review here mate <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wca-review-2011.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wca-review-2011.pdf</a>

 

[Rascal]

Yes Rasc, I have seen you on your 'better' days over the years and fully understand how debilitating your illness must be. I have nothing but admiration for the way you struggle on, through the pain, for a life worth living.

The crux of the matter is that there are many that do not have the degree of illness/disability that you have. Not by a long way.

These are the ones that they are out to get and, like any political party, they pander to the voters and everyone gets caught up in the net.

Mac you are obviously in a more advantageous position than many on this one so will be interested in hearing your thoughts on mine.

Whilst I have no doubt there are a number of bogus recipients how endemic is it? I had a look at some stats showing at introduction 1.1m claimed DLA and now it's a touch over 3m - a huge increase we will all agree...but is it? You are not eligible to file a new claim for DLA after 65 but if you claimed before you keep (therefore by now the "benefit" is catching a much wider group than initially); add to that the uptake in the early years as people became aware of the benefit plus those "released" from long-term "hospital" stays and we see the year-on-year increase at around 4% doesn't strike me of a system that is being systematically abused. It's also worth mentioning that DLA isn't an "out of work" benefit, it's for those that work as well, so comparing outward symptoms may not necessarily be a good indicator in this case.

Now DLA itself is designed to help with the extra cost of living for those that have a disability therefore I would have thought a reasonable "test" to eligibility would be a combination of a doctor/consultants diagnosis coupled with a demonstration from the recipient that they have "used" extra support (be that external or family support). The next issue I find discomfort with is the continuation of benefit if you claimed prior to 65 or not, now as a country we either provide the necessay access to the right type of support for the older (>65) population with disabilities or we don't...if we do then the benefit should stop at 65 if we don't then we either need to stop it or remove the upper age limit for new claims...there can be no evidence to support the current appearance of "inbalance".

@Harry, PD, malg and Rascal - Thanks for responses...I am shocked at involvement of a private company like ATOS in all this - I have no ideological reason for disliking private companies doing government work - but the methods and potential for conflict of interest look, at the least, suspect. This needs a thorough independent review.

Good post.

Agreed and thanks.

And today after i said little is reported in the papers this appears

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/atos-fatcat-lands-1m-bonus-941601" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/at ... nus-941601</a>

Unfucking believable

 

[blueinsa]

Mac you are obviously in a more advantageous position than many on this one so will be interested in hearing your thoughts on mine.

Whilst I have no doubt there are a number of bogus recipients how endemic is it? I had a look at some stats showing at introduction 1.1m claimed DLA and now it's a touch over 3m - a huge increase we will all agree...but is it? You are not eligible to file a new claim for DLA after 65 but if you claimed before you keep (therefore by now the "benefit" is catching a much wider group than initially); add to that the uptake in the early years as people became aware of the benefit plus those "released" from long-term "hospital" stays and we see the year-on-year increase at around 4% doesn't strike me of a system that is being systematically abused. It's also worth mentioning that DLA isn't an "out of work" benefit, it's for those that work as well, so comparing outward symptoms may not necessarily be a good indicator in this case.

Now DLA itself is designed to help with the extra cost of living for those that have a disability therefore I would have thought a reasonable "test" to eligibility would be a combination of a doctor/consultants diagnosis coupled with a demonstration from the recipient that they have "used" extra support (be that external or family support). The next issue I find discomfort with is the continuation of benefit if you claimed prior to 65 or not, now as a country we either provide the necessay access to the right type of support for the older (>65) population with disabilities or we don't...if we do then the benefit should stop at 65 if we don't then we either need to stop it or remove the upper age limit for new claims...there can be no evidence to support the current appearance of "inbalance".

@Harry, PD, malg and Rascal - Thanks for responses...I am shocked at involvement of a private company like ATOS in all this - I have no ideological reason for disliking private companies doing government work - but the methods and potential for conflict of interest look, at the least, suspect. This needs a thorough independent review.

Good post.

Agreed and thanks.

And today after i said little is reported in the papers this appears

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/atos-fatcat-lands-1m-bonus-941601" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/at ... nus-941601</a>

Unfucking believable

Roll on the fucking revolution.

Shit like this makes my fucking blood boil.

My comments before and boy was i right...

There is a complete lack of common sense and compassion.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if these employee's were on a bonus for everyone they managed to get off benefits.

 

[Rascal]

Further reading from a Daily Mirror blog

The replies are interesting reading

<a class="postlink" href="http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigations/2012/04/atos---how-much-grief-can-one.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigation ... n-one.html</a>

 

[libertine]

Cameron is so out if touch it's unreal.