Martin Bonner

Good work Charlie.

"A Lapsed appeal is where DWP changed the decision in the customer’s favour after an
appeal was lodged but before it was heard at a tribunal hearing".

We have to wonder how many claimants would have already given up, after being denied initially or at Mandatory Reconsideration.

A digital flyer with a bold orange and cream colour scheme titled “SIGN THE LETTER: STOP DISABILITY BENEFITS CUTS.” It highlights that the letter is led by healthcare professionals and backed by over 1,250 signatories. The flyer explains that government proposals could remove Personal Independence Payment (PIP) from 1.3 million people—nearly 40% of current claimants. Freedom of Information (FOI) data shows that 1,283,000 standard-rate and 209,000 enhanced-rate claimants could lose support under a new 4-point rule. It warns that this puts 1.49 million people at risk of losing £4,500 a year. It names those most affected: people with mental distress, neurodivergence, chronic illness, pain, and fatigue conditions. The flyer urges action with the phrase “Our formula for real impact: Personal testimony × Facts × Clinical backing = Change.” At the bottom, it includes the sign-up link (tinyurl.com/2tvfvzft) and a QR code for signing.

Please give this flyer to any healthcare provider you come across as the more signatures we get the better. Thanks to the fab
@argentas.bsky.social for the flyer idea, the qr code and being a FOi genius! #WelfareNotWarfare

Correct. Sorry, I meant to say activity, not descriptor

Yeah, it's the fact that the points awarded during the assessments can be so arbitrary that causes so much stress. You never know how they will assess from one time to the next, even if your condition hasn't changed!

Many sections you can only score even numbers and only washing and bathing has a 3pt option, so maximum of 21 points without scoring any 4s or above. But the point you were making about scoring lots of pts but getting nothing under the new rules is 100% correct

assets.ctfassets.net/vms0u05139aw...

It would be 21/84 (one '3' and nine '2's), because there is only one descriptor that has a '3 pts' option (most have descriptors that score 0, 2, 4 etc).

The point you made absolutely still stands though. You could score 21 points and still not be eligible for daily living under the new rules.

Thank you for pointing that out. I have plenty of experience of the PIP application, assessment, and scoring criteria, but don't have any experience with ESA or with UC WCA / LCWRA, so it's taking me some time to figure out all the implications of the changes to those groups.

The more I read the disability reforms green paper, the more it feels akin to:

"We've decided to drive a truck into a huge crowd of people. We're not consulting on that decision, but we invite responses on what mitigations we should put in place for those affected."

The daily living component is however used as the gateway for carers allowance and the carers element of UC. So there will be knock on effects from that if claimants lose the daily living component.

One think to bear in mind is that there are no changes proposed to the mobility component of PIP, which is generally what the local authorities are interested in with regard to blue badge applications. So even if someone loses the daily living component they should retain their mobility entitlement

As an aside - it's frustrating that this data was only released via the FOI process and wasn't included in the Green Paper evidence pack.

(Despite the Green Paper being released a month ago now, we still only have an "interim evidence pack", which just includes 6 charts rehearsing old material.)

Completely agree. It was also a disgrace that it took them 3 weeks to offer the document in an accessible format, particularly given the group the changes will affect.

Also, if the percentages they provided were for those who were not awarded at least 4 points in all ten categories, the figure for the standard daily living rate would have been 100%, as by definition anyone scoring 40+ points would be in the enhanced rate bracket and not the standard rate bracket.

I'll admit it may have been less confusing if I had posed the question the other way around, but *all* was correct in this context.
eg. "Which students scored less than 40% in *all* of their exams?" is the same as "Which students did not score 40% or more in *any* of their exams?"

DWP's wording is unhelpful, but I think actually the stats being provided re the 'all' and the 'any' FOIs are the same: if you sum 13% of 1.6m (standard DL) and 87% of 1.3m (enhanced DL) you get an overall 46% of the 2.9m total DL awards excluded.

I was hoping this was a mistake, but someone else has submitted a similar FOI, and the figures tally

13% of 1608000 = 209040
87% of 1283000 = 1116210
(209040+1116210) / (1608000+1283000) = 46% of total recipients do not meet the 4 pts requirement.

(The other FOI response says 54% do score 4 pts)

Text and table screenshot from the DWP response to my Freedom of Information request. The original document is linked in the post.

The DWP have responded to my FOI request. Their figures indicate that 87% of clamants currently receiving PIP daily living at the standard rate, and 13% of claimants receiving enhanced rate, are likely to lose their entitlement if the score 4 changes go ahead.

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pers...

Hi Rachel. It's already gone viral on X, and I've posted links there to the full FOI response, so I'm not worried either way. Thank you for asking though!

📣 Read our response to the new #WelfareGreenPaper released by govt yesterday that discusses changes to benefits in the UK. We want to see a system that respects, understands & listens to all, especially when it comes to people with #CKD

More info: kidneycareuk.org/news-from-ki...

I suspect they will drag their heels and/or refuse to release the information prior to the government's impact statement being published.

So sorry to hear this. There are so many who are perfectly happy to gaslight those with disabilities and complex long term health issues by telling them what they should and shouldn't be capable of, rather than listening to the lived expeiences of those for whom these issues are a daily reality.

The issue is that that the most significant proposals within the green paper are explicitly excluded from the the consultation

Benefits and Work have done a really good piece here, looking at what the DWP is and isn't consulting on.
It isn't consulting on the major issues: scrapping WCA; PIP Daily Living & UC Health Element; freezing UC HE until 2029/30; 4-point criterion for PIP
www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/dwp-lau...

Letter to Jow Powell MP for Kensington & Bayswater Dear Mr Powell, Disability benefits I was fortunate to be represented by your predecessors Karen Buck and Emma Dent Coad, whose personal commitments to social justice were sustaining through the dark days of the Tory governments from 2010. I was initially optimistic when Labour secured a majority last summer that the UK would be able to move away from an irrational commitment to the neoliberal economic dogma which has done so much to immiserate all but the very wealthiest people in this country. I'm afraid that any remaining optimism has been pretty much extinguished by today's statement by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. As a practising GP who has worked in the NHS since I qualified more than 20 years ago, I understand well the relationship between ill-health, disability and poverty, and I have witnessed at first hand the inevitable and deliberately cruel effects of previous governments' cuts to the support available to people who are not able to work: for any reason, but particularly because of illness and disability. I frequently provide reports for patients of mine who are claiming Personal Independence Payment for the first time, or who are undergoing reassessment, and so I am well aware of the already-stringent criteria that have to be met before PIP is awarded. In my professional opinion, there is no-one who would meet the current PIP criteria who could not be said to be significantly disabled.

In order to achieve a nugatory reduction in benefits spending, to help the Chancellor meet her self-imposed and self-defeating fiscal rules, Ms Kendall proposes to further tighten the eligibility criteria for PIP and other illness-related support, and to freeze, cut or abolish the incapacity components of Universal Credit. These changes are estimated to reduce claimants' incomes by several thousand pounds a year. We know from long experience that making people poorer doesn't make them any healthier, nor any more likely to find suitable and dignified work. Everyone, regardless of employment, pays taxes and stimulates the economy through their consumer choices. These kneejerk changes, chasing short-term gains, will have profoundly harmful long-term effects on individuals and on the economy as a whole.

Respected charities including Scope, Mind and the Child Poverty Action Group have already identified the harm these cuts will do to millions of people and their families who are already among the poorest in Britain. Your colleague Debbie Abrahams bravely warned the Government against “balancing the books on the backs of sick and disabled people.” The cynical media management on this issue that has been on display in the past few days has also been appalling. For the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to imply that disability benefits are given based on over-diagnosis of mental health problems, or to deliberately conflate PIP with being unemployed, is shameful. Baroness Grey-Thompson has rightly warned of the increase in discrimination, abuse and violence that disabled people will experience as a direct result of the Government's pandering to the worst instincts of the right-wing. What do you plan to do to limit the impoverishment, distress and further ill-health that will inevitably flow from these reckless proposals? Yours sincerely,

Wrote to my MP (Joe Powell, Lab, Kensington & Bayswater) fwiw
#UKpol #benefits

Personal Independence Payment (PIP) - a Freedom of Information request to Department for Work and Pensions Please could you provide the following information: The number of claimants currently in receipt of PIP daily living component at: a) The standard rate b) The enhanced rate For each of the above, pl...

I have submitted an FOI request to try and find out how many of those currently receiving PIP (personal independence payment) may lose their entitlement under the new rules:

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pers...

"We need to ask government what they think they're doing when they say disabled people ought to work, but they're making it damn near impossible for us to do so."

- Me for Novara Media live last night on Labour's cuts to PIP and other disability benefits

Repeatedly taking the easy choice on welfare – Joint Public Issues Team JPIT’s Paul Morrison responds to potential disability benefit cuts. In the November 2024 budget the Chancellor decided to keep the last government’s £3bn of disability benefit cuts which were pencille...

jpit.uk/repeatedly-t...

We're concerned to hear about potential cuts to the disability benefits which provide a lifeline to many people with #KidneyDisease who face additional costs of disability. We want a welfare system that treats people with dignity. More info: kidneycareuk.org/news-from-ki...

Check how to fill in your claim form Detailed information on how to fill in your ‘How your disability affects you’ form, including advice for each question and tick box.

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/sic...

Finally, if your disability causes fatigue, and carrying out one or more of the tasks on a given day would prevent you from completing others, that needs to be reflected in your answers and tickbox choices. Hopefully this will help you get started. Please feel free to DM me if I can advise further.