• Search
  • You are here:  
  • Home
  • News
  • Tell us if you support PIP awards based on disability costs

News

Tell us if you support PIP awards based on disability costs

Details

The survey is now closed.  Read more about the results here.

As carefully controlled workshops which appear designed to justify using costs to determine PIP awards are launched today by the Timms review, Benefits and Work is  asking readers to give their opinion.   

We want you to take a few seconds to answer a single question and, if you wish, make some comments afterwards.  Whatever happens, Timms should not be the only source of feedback on this idea.

Last week, the Timms review September update contained the bombshell proposal to fundamentally change the way PIP awards are decided. The recommendation was buried in the final few lines of a document that contained a blizzard of other recommendations.

The review is arguing that awards should be decided based on a fair contribution by the DWP to the extra costs of disability, based on categories including “equipment and aids; mobility and transport; clothing and bedding.”

This would be a huge change from deciding individual PIP awards on the basis of the difficulties that individuals experience with daily living and mobility activities and is likely to severely disadvantage some groups of claimants.

The only opportunity disabled people will have to comment on this proposal is via 15 workshops, to which just three hundred people – selected by the DWP from 4,000 applicants - have been invited. 

There is little doubt that much of the time at the workshops will be devoted to less life-changing issues, such as making the language in DWP communications more respectful.

And, at the end of the process, the DWP is likely to argue that the Timms review was co-produced by disabled people and therefore its conclusions are supported by the majority of disabled claimants.

There is also little doubt that, after all its deliberations, the Timms review will conclude that awards based on costs are the way forward.

So, in an attempt to discover if this is really what the majority of disabled people want, we are asking readers to take a very simple single question survey to say whether you support the idea of cost-based awards. You can also leave a comment as well, if you wish.

The survey is completely anonymous, but you can only complete it once.  There is a live link to the survey results, where we will also be publishing a selection of your comments each day.  So please don’t post anything you would not be happy to see published online.  If there are a large number of comments we will also use AI to summarise them.

The survey is now closed.  Read more about the results here.

Take part in the survey

Tell us whether you support the idea of PIP awards being based on disability costs.

Complete the survey Please share the link.

See the live results

See how people have voted and read a selection of anonymous comments from readers.

View the live results and comments

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.
    N.B.C
    · 14 days ago
    I absolutely DO NOT it's a disgraceful way to treat people as an excuse to cut down what anyone gets.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    N.B.C
    · 16 days ago
    Back in the 2010s the Tories had their own attempt at this sort of thing which led to hundreds of people deciding it wasn't worth continuing (poor sods) and it looks like they're boils be a potential for the same thing to happen again, I hope this doesn't happen seriously but this whole secrecy and lack of openness is not helping matters.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    JBob1234
    · 18 days ago
    The media reports on the Independent review into mental health conditions, ADHD and autism, look jaw dropping. The review commissioned by Streeting and headed by professor Peter Fonagy. Is apparently going to recommend triaging of people, where only those who are a danger to themselves or incapable of working are given a NHS formal diagnosis and specialist treatment. With everyone instead offered holistic help.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Alex
      · 17 days ago
      @DJMH15 I haven't had an ADHD appointment in over 2 year, supposed to get one annually.  And that's all it ever is - a medication review.  The service is useless. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      godgivemestrength
      · 18 days ago
      @JBob1234 That triage will solve nothing for anyone. Look at how much difficulty there is already with deeming someone incapable of work. As for danger to themselves, what about danger to others?

      Who who is going to be doing this triage? Fonagy is known as a neurodivergence denier, so there will be pushback.

      I think with all the reviews and surveys reporting this autumn the government is going to be gobbled up in its own witches' brew.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      DJMH15
      · 18 days ago
      @JBob1234 Well there is no specialist treatment right now...nothing whatsoever.  You literally get a diagnosis and then walk out with your head spinning...going back over all of your past...not really understanding what it means (because it means so many different things, to different people)...and having nobody to talk to about it because most likely you have no family or friends.  

      I don't trust them when they say treatment for this and that will replace benefits.  Of course it won't...Thatcher brought in DLA to replace treatment, to save costs.  Now they want to reverse that for the same stated reason.  There are currently 3000 people waiting for therapy where I live.  3000. The waiting list is over three years long.  A lot of people have undiagnosed autism.  

      7/10 people with autism are unable to work...the diagnosis itself doesnt help because employers dont want to take it on...but the diagnosis is important to understand what is going on.  It can be a real game changer, once you have gotten over the fact that there is really nothing out there to help you, other than an online charity forum. So how is it supposed to help not diagnosing people?  

      The other thing to bear in mind is that other mental health difficulties are often present where there is autism.  A lot of people in the mental health system for years are now being diagnosed with autism and adhd.  I have heard they think it is 40%.

      How about changing societal attitudes and making truly meaningful changes to make our society an inclusive one.

      I really cannot stomach Streeting.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      JBob1234
      · 18 days ago
      @JBob1234 That should read "with everyone else instead offered holistic help"

      If the media reporting is correct about the recommendations I would not be surprised if medical professionals en masse vehemently reject the recommendations. I would actually be surprised if they didn't.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Paul T
    · 18 days ago
    Disabled people have allowed this to happen by allowing successive governments to create a circumstance where because they have created a catch all benefit which makes no distinction between disabled people and those with poor or ill health the public see all PIP recipients as workshy scroungers. 

    Disabled people have / had rights enshrined in law. We have allowed those rights to become diluted to the point of redundancy. 

    It's high time people realised this hasn't happened by accident. PIP is not, and never was, a disability benefit. If it were then every cancer patient, HIV patient and MS patient (defined in law, both disability and equality, as disabled at the point of diagnosis) would automatically qualify for it.

    Tens of thousands of individuals diagnosed with the aforementioned conditions who apply for PIP are refused each year. It's time disabled people realised that the government view disability support as an unaffordable "burden".
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Pete.
      · 18 days ago
      @Paul T So let me get this right. 

      Are you blaming disabled people? 
      Do you only class physical disabilities as a disability? 
      Do you not count chronic illness or mental health illness or disorders as a disability?  
      As mental health disorders like Bipolar, Schizophrenia and all psychotic conditions are classed as disabilities under the 2010 disabilities act. 

      It is hard to get a read on your post on how you actually view a disability and why is it those with said disabilities fault?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    sara
    · 18 days ago
    @Wendy You're right about the confusion. The Review update was very badly delivered and allowed panic to spread, with tragic consequences.

    I tried a basic google search, which yielded an encouraging AI overview, but with some cautious reservations at the end:

    My search question:

    Will cost based pip mean voluntary exchange of cash for services?

    AI Overview:

    Yes, under the currently proposed framework, a "cost-based" or overhauled Personal Independence Payment (PIP) system would feature a voluntary part of the Timms Review of the disability benefit system, independent advisors and think tanks have proposed moving away from the rigid points-based "difficulty" assessment. Instead, they are exploring "cost categories" (such as specialized equipment, mobility/transport, and therapies) to determine awards.

    How the "Voluntary Exchange" Works:

    A core concept driving these reforms—backed by research frameworks like those from the Good Growth Foundation—is "Investing in Agency." It outlines a voluntary exchange mechanism built on the following rules:

    Cash Remains the Foundation:

    You will not be forced to give up your cash award. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) acknowledges that claimants heavily rely on cash to meet the baseline cost of living. )Opt-In Services: Claimants can choose to trade a specific slice of their weekly cash (e.g., £20 or £50) for direct, government-brokered services.Direct-to-Supplier Payments: Instead of giving you cash to find a private provider, the DWP would leverage state purchasing power to pay contracted suppliers directly.

    Therapies:

    Fast-tracked physiotherapy or Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT)

    Home Adaptations:

    Direct installations of ramps, rails, or home aids.Specialist Equipment: Mobility scooters, walking aids, or specialized bedding.

    Skills & Training:

    Direct access to employment support or vocational training.

    Contradictions and Alternate Proposals:

    While the advisory committee heavily emphasizes that this exchange would be strictly optional to preserve claimant autonomy, disability rights groups remain highly sceptical They fear that a "cost-based" model could lay the groundwork for a more restrictive voucher or receipt-reimbursement system—which would strip away independence rather than offer a truly voluntary swap.)

    The final report from the Timms Review is expected to be delivered to the Secretary of State, meaning concrete legislative choices will follow the review's publication.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      sara
      · 18 days ago
      @Wendy. We can accommodate a rant. Sounding off, melt downs, all good here. Many of us suffer the indignity of being assessed/treated by under qualified dwp and nhs staff, but It must be especially frustrating for you given your professional background.

      One of the problems with cbt, too, is that it is rationed - you get your dozen sessions at best, then you're all fixed, good to go, or, more likely, high and dry. Even when someone has a great cbt practitioner they are likely to need to fund private counselling for years, if not forever. It's very dangerous to cut people off from services like that. We're specifically warned against stopping medication suddenly, but things like cbt can just stop with no follow up.

      Missing your cpn visit is a similar hazard. After one cpn had a breakdown noone came for weeks to give a patient I knew the injection he'd been having monthly for decades, along with a catch up chat. He went into an ultimately fatal decline.

      There's no way all pip claimants can be routinely served by the nhs. There just isn't capacity.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Wendy.
      · 18 days ago
      @sara H Sara, thank you for taking the time to look this up, it's very much appreciated. It is so difficult to cut through what is real and what is media propaganda to suit a narrative. I like how there is some facts built in with this but also caution so we can keep on fighting, it is the sensatalsim on both sides of the fence that causes the confusion and anxiety that is dangerous. 

      The aspect of offering CBT to those with serious mental health conditions that involve psychosis can be dangerous especially via the NHS. As conditions like Bipolar, Schizophrenia, psychotic depression etc. I am a clinical psychologist and a medical doctor of forty years experience. CBT has been proven time and time again to basic for these conditions and can actually bring on crisis episodes. All that is offered by the NHS is this basic blueprint of outdated therapy and from what I have seen and experienced it it used badly by staff not trained to a clinical standard, i.e PHD level. Plus under the NHS it is free so why would the patient need to give up a  percentage of their PIP award to pay for a therapy widely regarded as only good for goal setting at best.

      Those with Bipolar, schizophrenia, psychotic depression need the cash element 100% so they can survive in the community in their own homes, if not they will struggle as these conditions are the most severe and difficult to stay in employment hence why under the current PIP rules they have a high percentage of awards due to so many aspects of these conditions and the severe side affect's of the numerous medications that are taken daily and have some of the highest rates of being a danger to themselves and others.  I am seriously concerned that removing or even the smallest change or cuts to PIP for these conditions will undo all the good care in the community has done and with mean those with Bipolar, Schizophrenia and psychotic depression will be forced back into institutions like the bad old days. 

      I am one of those who has Bipolar and schizophrenia, I was diagnosed in my 20s, worked for 40 years paying high taxation and then when I had a serious breakdown that not only affected my mind but body too from years of medication I now face being stripped of PIP and offered CBT by an underqualified NHS staff member. 

      Sara I am sorry to rant but I am currently in crisis with psychosis and all this is just adding to it. So i thank you for your kindness for looking this up and trying to help all of us who are suffering. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Wendy.
    · 18 days ago
    Some very conflicting views and extreme viewpoints on this comments section. Some saying it basically staying the same with an opt in scheme, others saying the sky's falling in and no PIP for anyone even with the most serious conditions especially mental health conditions, the most serious and debilitating life long conditions like Bipolar or schizophrenia.  

    I think there is so much confusion and this is dangerous. I wrote about my CPN losing a patient with Bipolar to suicide after he read that all benefits are stopping for all mental health conditions, even the most severe like Bipolar. We really need to be carful that our comments driven by fear don't drive others with severe mental health problems to take their own lives. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      DJMH15
      · 18 days ago
      @Wendy. I agree.  It is definitely something that will push people over the edge. Its a terrible way to treat people and a stain on this country.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Andrea
      · 18 days ago
      @Wendy. Its so heartbreaking to hear about this young man, thoughts and prayers for his loved ones. And to all who suffer with these terrible conditions, I have family who do and who have attempted suicide on numerous occassions,  you feel so helpless even though you do what you can to help and support them.

      I hope everyone gets the help and support they need.




    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      denby
      · 18 days ago
      @axab43 Agreed.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Wendy.
      · 18 days ago
      @axab43 I totally agree with you, he was only 27 years old, had Bipolar and was experiencing mania with psychosis and all the media negativity, the Reform benefits proposals' and the Timm's report pushed him over the edge. My CPN said his family don't want any publicity and just want to grieve, as most would so no media exposure to what is really happening. This is just one case of many i suspect as when mania and psychosis take hold everything is magnified or becomes a distorted reality. I am speaking from experience as a clinical psychologist and a Bipolar sufferer. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      axab43
      · 18 days ago
      @Wendy. The person who lost their life to suicide to all of this should be on the front pages of all newspapers and in the news.  The Timms Review now has blood on its hands, because of their lack of clarity and implied threats, people who are vulnerable will do things like take their own life.  It is tragic this person has done this, especially when the reality might not be as bad as they imagined.  
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Jon
    · 18 days ago
    We should all prepare for the worst case scenarios,regarding the Reviews.The whole thing is a Big Con.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      thelux
      · 18 days ago
      @Jon There's no easy way to 'prepare' for worst case scenario, it's hard to prepare for losing money when you're already in near-poverty. If you can't work and have no safety net or family/friend support, all the preparing in the world won't help having vital money taken away from you.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    rookie
    · 18 days ago
    My interpretation of the results of the survey so far is that those in favour believe the support packages will be in addition to the cash award or at least a voluntary exchange; those against believe there would be an overall decrease in the value of the award; those who dont know don't know.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    D
    · 18 days ago
    https://re-state.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/Benefitting-from-abroad.pdf

    It just never ends

    Many in politics and the media won’t be happy till they see disabled ppl digging their own graves with their bare hands

    What do ppl think is going to happen if you make millions ineligible for pip and only pay awards for the disability needs the dwp ‘accountants’ say check out.

    I think some of the public expect disabled to become invisible and easily ignored in this scenario but the opposite is probably true.

    We will get:

    - more homeless on the streets

    - employers with more interviews with disabled workers (and turning them down due to possible legal expenses)

    - more ‘weird’ people in the workplace and public mental breakdowns and ‘episodes’

    - the uk economy suddenly several billion down as less pip money being spent (instead being spent on foreign weapons by the sounds of things)

    - more court cases and tribunal as claimants will have nothing to lose if they no longer qualify (changes to pip happen happen when issues brought up in tribunal/upper tribunal - even if timms forces his nasty plans through they can still be unpicked bit by bit by the courts and it only takes a single claimant challenge at tribunal stage to make a huge difference to thousands of claimants - mm vs sec of state anyone)

    - massive increase on nhs/social care services.

    - thousands of ppl feeling like they have nothing left to lose (individuals can be triggered to do terrible things when in that state.


    Look, I have my own questions about pip overspending because it clearly wasn’t design to cater for the 1 in 4 people that are defined as disabled in the gov official description. But there are several things that can be looked at before going down the Orwell road

    - look at condition umbrellas and narrow them slightly so less are being diagnosed (eg…the autistic spectrum enlarged both in 97 and 2014 I think - Prehaps it needs to be condensed down slightly - I got diagnosed with Asperger’s which was high functioning in the 90s but I may be more mid functioning in 2026 diagnostic criteria today)

    - recognise that the pip numbers exploded from covid onwards and so long term 6+ year claimants have not caused the issue. I know the dwp want to increase f2f but prehaps they should prioritise those who have never had one before (excluding those that even the far right would agree is heavily disabled) - some may say it’s unfair but if pip f2f are going to be used more often prehaps let the claimants who have already had several not be prioritised for another one - they’ve been sufficiently vetted at this point.

    - make condition/disability official diagnosis by a qualified medical expert as important to pip as it was for dla - pip has excluded many visible disabled ppl but also awarded those who don’t have anything more than gp notes or self diagnosis - and bring back lifelong smaller cash awards

    - instead of taking away money add a ‘in work’ element to pip - the research with dogs that show they learn better via reward based training rather than negative reinforcement can be applied to human beings - hard to jump dwp hoops when they’ve fixed a ‘choke chain’ round our necks


    Unless the dwp also plan to award the state pension & child benefit based on age related needs (no luxuries) then these early proposals from timms are highly discriminatory 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Brian Wilson
      · 15 days ago
      @D It’s definitely a worry, and getting everything organised really helped me. I made a simple list of all the costs linked to managing my condition and attached proof for each one. Things like hiring a mobility car, equipment that eases pain (my inversion table and TENS machine, plus the ongoing cost of electrodes), natural remedies that actually work for me, and any extra care costs.
      Keeping it clear and itemised made it much easier for the DWP to understand the impact on my day to day life.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      bronc
      · 18 days ago
      @D Thanks for that informative post. I have a neurological disease called ME/CFS. The Dept of Health care plan of July 2025 acknowledges that people with ME suffer from health inequalities and an illness which is poorly understood by most health professionals and which has suffered many years of under investment in terms of research. Like many people I know with ME I would love to go back to work but there is no investment into searching for new or repurposed drugs to enable us to try going back to work. You can't demonise people with my illness, over 90% of whom are too ill to work and suffer a very low quality of life as proven by numerous research studies, and then not invest in potential treatments unless you really don't care what happens to this large group which is over 400,000 strong. After many years of being an advocate for people with my illness I strongly believe that the political and medical establishment really don't care what happens to us as long as we don't make a fuss and remain invisible from public life.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      JBob1234
      · 18 days ago
      @D Re-State also appears to take no account of the UK having lower income replacement benefits than other nations. And that this lower starting point may necessitate the UK having higher disability benefits than other nations.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      JBob1234
      · 18 days ago
      @D Re-State acknowledges that PIP does not just cover the additional costs of disability it covers care needs as well. While in other nations care needs are provided for partly or fully by state care provision or an additional separate benefit to that for extra costs of disability. But Re-State does not appear to take this into account when comparing PIP claimant numbers and PIP expenditure to other nations benefits. Nor does Re-State appear to release that removing care from PIP does not just save money it costs money as you need to provide that care or have an additional benefit to fund care.

      Re-State also appears to have a poor understanding of disabilities. For example calling autism a psychiatric disorder.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      denby
      · 18 days ago
      @tintack Agreed especially last paragraph, PIP fraud is so low.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    axab43
    · 19 days ago
    I also don't understand this as this very issue was discussed on a panel on a chat show with a welfare expert.  It was clarified as there would be a choice for part of the PIP award to be swopped for costs of equipment.  Not all of the award would be based on costs as there is still the assessment and they have spoken a lot on mental health issues on the Timms Review.  If they were solely going to base any full award on costs, then they would not need to discuss mental health issues at all. 

    This was the conclusion of the panel I saw on the tv last week and they discussed this at length and repeated it would be a choice.   So were they wrong in saying this?  Is it not going to be like this?  Very confusing.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      axab43
      · 18 days ago
      @axab43 I actually apologise as reading further this is not actually an opt in or choice award.  It is so confusing.   But it is not the whole PIP cash award being replaced either.  It is so bad they release these vague and confusing hints at what they might do.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      axab43
      · 18 days ago
      @JBob1234 I was not saying that at all.  I have a severe mental illness which is crippling.  I was saying mental health costs can be much harder to prove than physical illness and the TImms review specifically mentioned things like wheelchairs etc again for an OPT IN service, not compulsory.

        The point of this was to reassure people with mental health issues that their money would not be taken away.   Not an discussion about what costs are involved with mental health issues.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      axab43
      · 18 days ago
      @axab43 I have severe mental health issues.  I was not saying if mental health issues do not involve costs.  They do not involved provable costs with receipts the way physical disabilities might. 

      The point about this was not about mental health issues.  It was saying is this costs thing is going to be an  opt in issue, not compulsory and it will not cover the whole of PIP.  It will be offered as a part of what people can opt into, it won't be the whole bill

      Aw,.... please be careful who you are accusing of "throwing the mentally ill" under the bus.  I was trying in this post to clarify matters for people like myself, who panics over everything.   This is NOT about taking all money away and having to prove expenditure through costs.  It is an OPTING IN and choosing to have some services instead of cash.


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Aw
      · 18 days ago
      @axab43 Can you clarify what you mean about mental health and costs? It reads as if you are implying that having a severe MH disability doesn't incur costs? I hope that's not what you're saying because first of all you'd be dead wrong and secondly it would play into their deliberate game of trying to make us fight amongst each other, physical against mental, to get the scraps of whatever is left of PIP once they're done cutting it. I would urge anyone who thinks they'll save themselves by throwing the mentally ill under the bus, to remember that once cuts on one group become accepted they will rapidly spread and eventually they will come for you too.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      JBob1234
      · 18 days ago
      @axab43 I think you underestimate the amount of supervision, support, and care some people with mental health conditions need. If you think they have no care costs.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    axab43
    · 19 days ago
    Does anyone know how long this will take to go through and if they could impose this on existing claimants?  I have three years left on PIP and two years until the review window opens.  As a mental health recipient, with severe issues,  this will probably wipe out any costs.

    Can anyone also  know if this is definitely probably going to be the way forward, from the way things are looking?  Or is that just one of other options.

    Or will they have an old system in place until they set this totally new system up?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      axab43
      · 17 days ago
      @DJMH15 Thank you for your reply.  I should have said I am nearly 64, I will get State Pension in three years.  I have had a PIP extension until October 2027, two months before my pension and have just passed a Universal Credit review.  So I am hoping I will escape any more stress, at least all of this stress of a new system.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      DJMH15
      · 18 days ago
      @axab43 Best to put these sort of questions through AI.
      My understanding is that any changes will take time.  DLA to PIP, UC...10 years.  3 years to the point of rollout is minimum, and then the rollout will be phased and with transitional protection.  I mean, we don't know do we...and I have just speculated a long with everyone else.  This is a huge part of the problem...the constant change of direction.  And of course, if another party get in while these changes are being undertaken, then I guess we will all be going in a different direction which will take us back to the beginning, time wise.
      I think that if these changes go through and there is an opt in system, then it does line us up for a more severe system of vouchers down the road.  But that will cost a fortune to run, and ages to implement.
      So...I dont know how old you are, but I would say use what you have now wisely to try and shore up your future self.  A few extra clothes put away, some extra food and toilettries, change your car if have one and can afford to.  The aim being to try and feel a bit more secure.  That is the real issue, hierarchy of needs, we need the security of a roof over our heads and food just to be on the first rung of the ladder.  anyway... try not to worry.  Nothing is happening right now, this moment, or for the rest of the day

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    k
    · 19 days ago
    No services 
    Negation
    isolation
    discrimination
    have no price.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Idonia
    · 19 days ago
    I use my PIP to pay the £415 p/m shortfall between UC Housing element and rent. My home is adapted for my needs as a visually-impaired person and is my only safe place. The rest of the PIP goes on transport costs to the 2 - 3 medical appointments I attend each week and paying for the items I need to manage my health conditions which aren't available on prescription and have to be purchased. These proposals terrify me as they will leave me homeless. I'm reliant on a constant supply of electricity to run my fridge which stores my life-preserving medications, so without a home (and therefore, no access to a fridge) I'd be gone within a few weeks.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Andrea
    · 19 days ago
    Ive completed the survey, i totally disagree with these proposals, i have added survey comments. 
    Will the results of this survey and additional comments weve added be given to Timms and company. The results need to be published / produced into a document and should also be sent directly to Burnham and othe MPs
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    James
    · 19 days ago
    Anyone really surprised?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Akire24
    · 19 days ago
    If they go with this then those with family carers will not need  70% of PiP surely? I’m paying to be washed, dressed, someone make meals, all that stuff. Meanwhile family next door have a family carer so no daily care costs for the very basic's of life. When councils do care charges they say “that’s what pip is for hand it over”. So which is it? Or will they actually pay those who have more care costs more money so they have same disposable income “for everything else” that someone with a carer gets? 

    Both cases have sky high extra needs yet only one gets to use it and improve their quality of life. Bet that’s not addressed in this review. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Wolfydoc
      · 18 days ago
      @JBob1234 And the council takes SDP and also currently takes transitional protection on top of PIP to pay for care if required.
      Reversing cuts doesn't help, as the money is taken for care.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      sara
      · 18 days ago
      @JBob1234 For clarity - The sdp was added to legacy benefits if you got PIP daily living and lived alone. It wasn't added to pip. It's still added to pension credit, again if you get pip daily living and live alone.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      JBob1234
      · 18 days ago
      @Akire24 That used to be the case. Those on PIP daily living who lived alone used to get severe disability premium. Those who had an unpaid family or friend carer who lived at the same address and/or someone received carer's allowance for them, did not.

      Then they abolished severe disability premium. Using the justification the premium was a duplication paying for care being paid for by government funding of local authorities, the NHS, and PIP. But gave transitional protection to pre-existing claimants.

      Labour needs to stop cutting benefits and needs to reverse cuts Labour opposed when they were opposition. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Just Saying
    · 19 days ago
    This isnt what they are proposing is it?  I mean, the way I read it the government is proposing to keep the benefit as cash, whilst also putting in place some aspects of it that are more like the motability scheme.  An opt in scheme.  I know this wont go down well, but i do think that this sort of article is causing unnecessary distress.  If you are reading this then dont lose all hope!  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      axab43
      · 19 days ago
      @Just Saying This is what was said on the discussion I heard on tv last week where they were talking about an opt in scheme, where part of the benefit is swopped for equipment, like as you said the motability scheme.  They said it would be optional and would only be part of the award as well.   The rest of the benefit would be based on assessment and on how people's condition affects their daily living not just on tasks they can do.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    (No) hope
    · 19 days ago
    I’ve read through the live results and comments, and I’d like to think that these same results are somehow fed directly into this round table stage of the Timms review. Is there any way we could make that happen?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    D
    · 19 days ago
    Sorry - my last post is from a independent article (paywall) - 1st past of post got cut somehow

    https://inews.co.uk/news/claims-mass-adhd-overdiagnosis-set-rejected-experts-major-report-strong-4766147
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Moose
    · 19 days ago
    A ridiculous and onerous proposal that cannot possibly be dumped on claimants. 

PIP & The WCA Are Changing- Get The Latest News

Stay updated with our free, fortnightly newsletter.

Over 140,000 claimant and professional subscribers.

 
iContact

Latest news

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.

Ok Decline
More about cookies