MPs are expected to vote on the  Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill tomorrow whilst the secretary of state for work and pensions is unable to explain what will happen to current PIP claimants if they are reassessed after November 2026.

Vicky Foxcroft asked Kendall today (see around 16.10 on parliament tv) , “If claimants request a reassessment because of  worsening health conditions, will they be assessed under the current criteria or the new eligibility criteria?”

Kendall replied,  “As is the case now, people can request reassessment whenever they want.  For existing claimants they will remain under the new rules unless they request a reassessment until November 2026.  From November 2026 onwards, there will be that 4 point minimum.”

Aside from being almost nonsense – how can existing claimants “remain under the new rules” – Kendall’s answer does seem to say that if you are an existing claimant and you request a change of circumstances review after November 2026 your protection from the 4-point rule disappears.  

But the whole point of the protection from the 4-point rule is supposed to be that, if your award is reviewed after November 2026, you will still be under the current rules not the 4-point rule.

In which case, according to Kendall the system will be different depending on whether an existing claimant has a planned award review or a change of circumstances award review.

Whether Kendall got it wrong or this is actually the plan, the degree of confusion – and the lack of written information - just 24 hours before MPs are expected to vote on a bill which will affect millions, is extraordinary and makes a mockery of the entire process.

UPDATE:  the DWP have now apparently confirmed that Liz Kendall "misspoke" and that change of circumstances reviews for current claimants will not involve the 4-point rule after November 2026.  As we said, utter confusion and a mockery of the democratic process.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 days ago
    the obscure wording they are using for the 4 point rule is based around "supervising" it will no longer be enough that you have to be supervised/encouraged to complete thier so called "activities" in order to qualify you will literally have to be unable to do anything. What I am not seeing is the additional impact that this will have on carers - anyone who looses thier PIP any carers allowance connected to it is stopped immediately - figures show that women are far less likely to be diagnosed with a condition suffering medical bias of "hysteria" and "it is all in your head" when facing the misogyny that is rife in the medical profession [and I speak from first hand experience] further women are also far more likely to be pushed into "caring" roles - so when carers lose the carers income and have to go to work to stem off impending homelessness is social care ready for the increase in demand for support for disabled people who will be left with no support? I highly doubt that the government have even had this cross thier minds. With the rhetoric that Reform UK are coming out with in regards to false promises and claims of lifting the 2 child cap and support for disabled people the actions of this Labour government are literally handing them an election win - then the disabled, LBGT+ , minority groups will all be persecuted without restraint. You only have to remember Farage and his 350 million bus promise during Brexit to know how far and deep that guy will lie and deceive to get what he wants. I checked the voting records for this bill and found my local MP Chris Ward voted in favour of the bill - I have written to him prior to the votes on how badly this will go for Labour if they continue to push this and got a standard copied and pasted reply of the statement issued by Labour in the first round of this whole shambles starting  - now I know he voted in favour I will be sending further emails to him to express my anger and disgust 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 days ago
    Probably a Freudian slip...she's determined to implement the 4 point rule for everyone somewhere along the line. Horrible woman. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 days ago
    I will tell you what will happen, people reassessed will come under the new rules. I have been waiting for my review since Sept 2024. Received a letter about a month ago explaining it had still not been done, but they hoped to complete it by July 2026. Smelt a rat, so I got the Local MP involved. Within a week, I got a new award for 2 years until 1997. Nothing has improved with my conditions; if anything, they are worse and will continue in that way. Previously, I have been awarded 5 years after a review, and I can still smell a rat. I do not trust this Government one bit; their track record of lying is shameful. I've asked for the local MP to intervene and await with baited breath and increased anxiety.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Andy Ask you MP why you were awarded on 2 years from being awarded 5 years when nothing has changed. Ask them why the DWP are arbitrary.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 days ago
    It's all a big farce, nobody appears to have a full understanding of what is and isn't changing or of the affect it will have on claimants old or new.
    How are claimants supposed to understand the outcome if the government ministers don't even understand it
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 days ago
    That woman should be nowhere near the benefits system Last night her and Timms utterly lied saying struggling families claiming UC can redefine themselves as disabled in order to get more money! This is a blatant and disturbingly dangerous lie. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    I'm still confused as to weather retirement people will be reassessed 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    I'm utterly confused 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    I think that if the 4 point rule is waived for existing claimants of PIP the DWP will just tighten up on some other area of the assessment.  
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    Just heard we have lost the battle. I am absolutely devastated along with everyone else who will now be devastated too. Can anyone advise or shed light on any of this still being stopped. I'm a confused as everyone else about the 4 point rule and whether it's subject to renewals too. My claim runs out Feb 2027. I've had recent diagnosis and changes for the worse. Do I raise a new assessment or leave well alone. None of it is clear. But reading some positive comments here and praying that this information is right. And any form of reasesmet should not matter past next November.?? I've not seen the exact details yet I've just seen they have lost by 75 votes. Is there room for discussion on delaying anything. But the dwp will be absolutely inundated with people trying to make claims before next year. So my claim may well take me past my due date anyway. Or do I request a new one? 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Lizzy looks like she's been let out ...
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    “EXCUSE ME MS KENDALL, YOUR MISUNDERSTANDING IS SHOWING”.

    Yesterday we all heard the line that ‘the 4 point rule WILL apply when existing claimants are re-assessed’.  
    This was then somewhat denied by something Mr Timms wrote…… and the DWP….. and The Guardian seemed to echo…

    How on EARTH can we watch this all unfold today with any reassurance or confidence???

    I for one am writing to my MP this morning and asking him to vote against this debacle.  The whole thing is still only a very rough draft of what ‘might’ happen, and no MP should trust this ridiculous 
    bill, which is only a proposal, at best! 

    It feels as if there should be a request for all of this to be scrapped, started again, and re-written, especially since the ‘amendments’ seem to have been written on the back of a fag packet, over the weekend. 


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    When do we start taking bets on the sh… shenanigans the DWP will pull to turn your PIP review or reassessment into a a new claim subject to the new rules?

    Accidentally closing claims?
    Didn’t receive your response in time?
    Administrative errors?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Kendall said today in parliament, "We have listened carefully," then added "in particular to disabled people and their organisations". 

    What complete disingenuous  BS, she and the government were forced to climbdown because of the rebellion, not because they listened to disabled people, in fact they were tone deaf and arrogantly dismissed the concerns of disabled groups and charities. 



    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @MJ I know it's a complete farce, they really do underestimate the general public, their arrogance is staggering. I don't trust a thing they say and this is just a face and power saving exercise, these changes need heavy forensic legal scrutiny before rubber stamping.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    HUFFPOST headline:

    “'The Dog Ate My Homework': Starmer Mocked For Claiming He Was Too Distracted To Notice Welfare Revolt”

    Says it all
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Article from the guardian tonight on new amendment started by Rachael Maskell MP

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Kendall Mis-Speak. Letter went to MP's from Stephen Timms this evening. Shared by contributor on Scope Charity Forum.

    DWP confirms 4-point rule won't apply to existing Pip claimants reassessed in future - after Kendall mis-speak implies otherwise.

    The Department for Work and Pensions has released a https://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2025-0432/DCL-Welfare_Reform.pdf that Stephen Timms has sent to MPs about the concessions on the welfare bill. It contains a Q&A, and the text of the amendments relating to Pip.

    The Q&A covers what will happen to existing Pip claimants if their claims are reassessed. It says: 

    As part of our measures to strengthen the UC and Pip bill, we will bring forward an amendment for Commons committee so that the 4-point minimum only applies to new claims. This means that no existing claimants will be subject to the 4-point requirement, including if they undergo an award review, whether planned or due to a change in circumstances. Those making a new claim after the measure comes into force (not before November 2026) will be subject to the 4-point requirement.

    Earlier in the Commons Liz Kendall seemed to the opposite, implied that existing claimants would be subject to the four-point rule if they ask for a reassessment after November 2026. (See 4.38pm.) But DWP sources have said Kendall mis-spoke, and that the situation is as set out in the DWP Q&A.

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    In the Update from the DWP does it mention what will happen to existing UC health element (LCWRA) claiments after 2028 when the WCA is scrapped?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @D2
      You are so right with their shenanigans at the moment. I am migrating from ESA to Universal Credit and they have absolutely screwed me over at the moment. They keep doing things wrong. They’re not getting the right information and even CAB who’s helping me can only see I’m worse off.
       God help us if labour carries on like this as we will be back in the dark ages faster than switching off the power grid!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @GLB
      "In the Update from the DWP does it mention what will happen to existing UC health element (LCWRA) claiments after 2028 when the WCA is scrapped?"

      I doubt it says anything about that. The legislation abolishing the WCA is due later in the year. That's when we'll find out what they're planning.

      In the absence of any statement to the contrary, my guess would be that they currently intend to reassess all existing UC health claimants using the new PIP-based criteria from 2028. However, whether this will actually happen is not at all certain. Even if they get the current bill through - and that is still not guaranteed - they will only have done so by promising that existing PIP claimants will be reassessed for PIP under the existing criteria, not the harsher criteria due to come into force in November 2026. What happens after that with the Timms review is anyone's guess, but still, they have had to promise not to subject existing PIP claimants to the new assessment criteria in order to have any chance of getting this bill through.

      If they go ahead with reassessing all existing UC health claimants for UC health using the new PIP-based criteria then a huge number of people will lose out. There are 600,000 existing UC health claimants who don't get PIP daily living - and it's highly likely that most of those 600,000 are people who, like me, don't get PIP at all. So that's 600,000 people who will lose UC health and be plunged into dire poverty. Depending on what happens with the Timms review, it's possible that a lot of existing PIP claimants could lose their PIP daily living if they're subjected to the Timms assessment. If so, that's another large number of people who would also lose their UC health. But even if we disregard that, and assume it's "only" those existing LCWRA claimants who don't get PIP daily living, that's a hell of a lot of people.

      That looks to me like precisely the sort of scenario which is likely to produce another major rebellion. You can bet your bottom dollar that if that's what the government says it wants to do there will be another major campaign of pressure on Labour MPs from their consituents,  charities, activists, etc.. In that situation the government may have to agree not to reassess existing UC health recipients for UC health using the new PIP-based system, especially as Kendall said this earlier today on the subject of a two-tier system:

      "I would say to the House, including members opposite, that our benefits system often protects existing claimants from new rates or new rules, because lives have been built around that support, and it's often very hard for people to adjust."

      It's not hard to see that statement being quoted back at her if they try to get away with not protecting existing UC health claimants from the new PIP-based criteria.

      MPs currently rebelling on the green paper now know that they have the numbers to overturn the government's huge majority if they organise. It seems to be acknowledged as a truth of Westminster that when MPs have crossed the rubicon to defy the government once, it becomes easier to rebel on subsequent votes. 

      So, if they do try to shaft us over LCWRA we will all need to man the barricades again, just as we have over the last three months.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @GLB I have NOT had the chance to look at that yet! They are causing me too much grief with migration from ESA to UC and their chaos.

      Also I am trying to keep on top of the announcements tomorrow. 

      They will probably say one thing but then have a lacuna that they can fill inlater  to rescind on their promises later.

      I HOPE WITH EVERY FIBRE OF MY BEING - THIS GOES OUR WAY TOMORROW!



  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago

    The lot of them DO NOT what they are doing whatsoever! This is what I mean how could we trust their promise?

    At the moment they are causing utter chaos with the ramping up of managed migration from ESA support Group to equivalent on UC!

    There has been nothing but confusion and stress hurdled at me due to me migrating with 'out of the blue' 'UC with 'New Style ESA' attached. 

    This is what I mean they are UNABLE to cope now with the differences in claims on Managed migration from ESA to UC! 

    IF this bill proceeds forward tomorrow how the hell are they actually going to ensure that DWP staff are going to deal with the rest effectively?

    The cruel reforms that they propose NEVER SHOULD BE RUSHED it affects millions. AND THOSE WHO FOLLOW AFTER US!

    Their 'promises' sick to death of their broken promises and already shambolic systems to include the DWP 

    Now we wait and see what tomorrow brings!






  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    I couldn't decide if she was wearing the uniform of a dental hygienist or a straightjacket. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard 😂 I would think the latter as more apt.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Or a used tent from Glastonbury! 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Looked like a straightjacket to me. I even said so to my parents. Very apt. Needs to be in one. The womans lost her grip on reality.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Well we know which it ought to be.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Totally agree, B&W, it is ridiculous.

    They can't be so confused on a policy that will affect so many. 

    Irresponsible

    Scrap the bill and start again with true coproduction with those that get it

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.