1. Patients launch $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
The ePatient Revolution
Ryan Prior shares his experience and his thoughts from attending the Stanford Medicine X Conference as he contemplates the rising of the ePatient Revolution ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

UK documentaries investigate Work Capability Assessment/Atos Undercover

Discussion in 'Finances, Work, and Disability' started by Firestormm, Jul 31, 2012.

  1. Firestormm

    Firestormm Guest

    Messages:
    5,824
    Likes:
    5,976
    Cornwall England
    Don't contributory claimants after a year reclaim under income assessed, Currer? It's means-tested sure but if they have no other/little other income they aren't kicked off the benefit completely are they?
     
  2. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes:
    5,602
    Ta.

    The rationale is just hilarious.

    The chart which shows how the changes affect those in the bottom 20% of incomes on page 11 is pretty sick. For those in the bottom 10% of incomes, losing £35 a week is no joke.

    The whole thing is pretty sick.
     
  3. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes:
    5,602
    It places people with partners/dating/etc in a really difficult position. Their income become dependent upon not living with anyone who is earning any money! No consideration on how that will impact the lives of the sick and disabled in their CBA. Bastards.

    The income that removes one from elligability is really low. Even if one partner is only able to work part-time, that can be it. For couples where both have health problems, but one is trying to do some work, this going to make their lives even more difficult.

    The reforms are so brutalising.
     
  4. currer

    currer Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes:
    774
    I dont want to upset people or start a panic. I do not know what the details of this latest "reform" (dreadful word) are, and benefit regulations can work in unpredictable and unexpected ways.
    Everyone will be in different circumstances and the new regulations will apply differently to each.
    I dont know what the income limits are for disabled people if they are to be means tested.
    I do not know whether they will be the same as social security means tests for healthy unemployed.
    If you are concerned about these changes it is best to find out exactly how you individually will be affected and not rely on what another person has surmised. i do think that both the healthy population and the disabled population have not yet become aware of the impact of these "reforms". I wonder what will happen when it sinks in.
    I believe that WRAG is time limited to a year, and after that means testing will apply, probably both on income and savings.

    The benefits and work website is the best for this information, as it keeps up to date http://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/

    Because these regulations are brutal, they are being challenged, including by the BMA. So I hope they can be modified.

    We dont want Briish towns to have a ring of shanty towns around each one made out of old cardboard and corrugated iron like some South American slum, do we?
     
    taniaaust1 likes this.
  5. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes:
    5,602
    If you have capital of over £16,000, then you're intelligible for means tested ESA. Any savings over £6,000 lead to a reduction in payment.
     
  6. currer

    currer Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes:
    774
    Found these two items:-

    Asset rule for ESA(IR)

    In order to qualify for Income Related ESA, your savings and assets must not exceed £16,000.
    In addition, for every £250 in excess of £6000, there will be a £1 deduction from any benefit payable.
    Example
    You have £10,000 in savings and/or assets. The excess is £4000 (£10,000 - £6000). The deduction is £16 (£4000 / £250).


    24 hour work rule for ESA(IR)
    In order to qualify for Income Related ESA, your partner must not be in remunerative work for more than 24hours/week.
    There are some exceptions to this rule.
    • childminding done in your partner's home
    • voluntary work or work done for a charity or voluntary organisation in return for payment to cover your expenses.
    • attendance on a training scheme for which a training allowance is paid
    • receiving assistance under the New Deal self-employment route
    • work as a councillor
    • caring for a foster child or providing respite care in your partner's home
    • being in receipt of a Sports Council National Lottery award (and no other payment for that sporting activity)
    • duties undertaken by part-time firemen, auxiliary coastguards, part-time lifeboat crews, members of a territorial or reserve force.
    Your partner will not be classed as being in remunerative work if he or she is-
    • mentally or physically disabled and has reduced earnings or works reduced hours as a result of that disability
    • involved in a trade dispute
    • regularly and substantially caring for someone who is in receipt of Attendance Allowance or the highest or middle rate of the care component of Disability Living Allowance.
    • in receipt of Carers Allowance
    • living in a care home, an Abbeyfield home or an independent hospital and requires personal care
     
  7. currer

    currer Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes:
    774
    Esther it could be that work up to 24 hours per week will not count. See above post. But it is hard to get accurate information about all the details of how ESA will work in practice. And before anyone worries about their own situation it is important to know all the facts.
     
  8. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes:
    5,602
    That's true - thanks for posting the info for people. (I was counting 24 hours as part time, and it would certainly be a struggle to support two on a low hourly wage when only able to do that amount of work, but it could be okay for others). It also seems like things are still in a state of flux, so things could well change by the time that people have to face moving to income related ESA.

    I'm doubtful that things will improve though.
     
  9. Firestormm

    Firestormm Guest

    Messages:
    5,824
    Likes:
    5,976
    Cornwall England
    Yes. Thank you Currer. I have been reading of people getting letters after a year on Contribution-based. Some are able to switch, some are not. Best to ring and find out perhaps ahead of time.

    It's a really difficult one. It seems that whilst they no longer afford preference to couples for tax purposes and opted for the individual assessment route - under this system they want to include a partners earnings and status. Seems 'odd' and unfair to me.

    We're back to ideals again. Ideally the WRAG was intended to be a short-term 'holding tank' whilst greater support was afforded to move people into work.

    Reality is that more and more people are being shifted here from IB and elsewhere when they ought really to be in the 'support group'. And importantly, there is very little sign - I have heard nothing - about additional support that was promised for people in WRAG.

    And of course people in WRAG receive less in benefits than people in the Support Group.

    I've been in WRAG (only for my NI Contributions) for 4 years now. I have never been contacted by Job Centre for support and retraining/whatever.

    If I felt I was able to work and be productive I would ring them up to complain. I would nevertheless be interested to learn what experiences people have had with the retraining/support if indeed it has taken place.
     
  10. currer

    currer Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes:
    774
    Note - the work rule applies to partners of claimants - not claimants - so is a relaxation of the usual means testing regulations - if I have interpreted correctly.
     
  11. Firestormm

    Firestormm Guest

    Messages:
    5,824
    Likes:
    5,976
    Cornwall England
    Reply from Ed Millipede to Sonia Paulton:

    Posted: 21 August 2012
     
  12. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes:
    5,602
    Ta Fire.

    I think I prefer the Conservative on disability - at least they seem to realise that they're making the lives of the sick and disabled worse, and doing so in order to save money. I fear that Labour are genuinely deluded about the impact that their policies have had, and genuinely think that providing resources for those with health problems to spend on improving their quality of life is some sort of 'trap'.
     
    Tito likes this.
  13. Simon

    Simon

    Messages:
    1,451
    Likes:
    4,635
    Monmouth, UK
    Thanks for the letter, Fire
    Don't forget that it was Labour that devised this scheme and gave the contract to ATOS, happy to accept it's computer-driven assessment system without any evidence it actually assessed people's ability to work. The Coalition then joined in the fun by restricting contribution-based WRAG to 12 months. Labour, and others in the Lords tried unsucessfully to increase this to 24 months, but I don't think Labour actually opposed the principle of time-limiting WRAG, even if claimants remained too ill to work.

    Let's just hope that Labour are sincere in their professed desire to make the system work for those that need it.
     
  14. SilverbladeTE

    SilverbladeTE Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,141
    Likes:
    1,712
    Somewhere near Glasgow, Scotland
    Labour are a bunch of two bit shyter smuck gits, to be blunt
    they were hand in glove with this ATOS scam, they were hand in glove with the attacks on the disabled in th media
    they are JACKALS who have sod all to do with what the Labour Party was created to be.
    it's a cheap perversion, a racket
    they were cheaper and easier to buy than the Conservatives, that's the only damn difference and they should rot in Hell for selling out their principles as well as their people.
    *spits!*

    As I said some time ago, the Sheeple were eager ot have a new scapegoat to blame for their misfortunes, since the media can't abuse gays, jews, blacks or such, they needed a new whipping boy, so it was the disabled.
    And no one will give a damn until the body count piles up too high
    SAME AS HAS HAPPENED REPEATEDLY!
    and assholes not only fell for it, but went along with it and refused to admit it, refused to see the lines of poor bastards going back into history who've bene thrown to the wolves to divert attention from the REAL enemy, the real scum: the merdestains at the top of the totem pole!
    Meh!!

    Time after time...
    Stop thinking the "government will save us", they are the ENEMY, they're up to their necks in this
    if it gets out they were behind this cull of the disabled, "big names" will fall, so they're all too busy saving their own asses and they'll whine and please and cry they didn't know and nothing gets done, they delay delay ignore and obfuscate and sitll more die. You cna see it happening already, it's like the Weasels, they lay down ground work, a "parachute", a "rat line", their excuses to escape punishment and nice comfy jobs with corproations they'd happily turn you into SOAP for, long as they get their nice cushy pay outs for life.
    They walk out of the Front Bench of Parliament into big juicy contracts, usually several or even DOZENS of 'em.

    Tony The Bastard Blair earns £12 to 20 million a year! Know how much tax he pays?
    From £20 million over two years he paid a total of £470,000 a in tax. Roughly 20%!!
    THAT is the reality.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol.../Tony-Blair-and-the-8million-tax-mystery.html
     
  15. hurtingallthetimet

    hurtingallthetimet Senior Member

    Messages:
    612
    Likes:
    115
    hello i dont understand any of the way they do things...i have folder hubby had me keep stuff in when i was trying to file..i didnt understand questions...when id ask lady she was nice but it was strange...i recall cause i gave fun fact to kids...i didnt understand lifting part...she said 2 gallen milk equals 8 pounds..and to go by if i could lift with one hand ...and i cant without hlep bending legs back using other hand etc...and she said make sure put number so i did...i think she was frustrated when i didnt know how much i could lift with one hand and guess that was her fun fact....others things i didnt understand well either but since i gave fun fact to kids i remember the milk thing...

    i didnt have anyone physically with me at time to fill out...but theyd give me number to call and gvie answers too...i dont understand alot of it and it probably has nothing to do with your post but made me think of it....cant remember what i did two minutes ago but i can tell you 2 gallon milk equals 8 pounds...lol
     
  16. hurtingallthetimet

    hurtingallthetimet Senior Member

    Messages:
    612
    Likes:
    115
    hello i dont understand any of the way they do things...i have folder hubby had me keep stuff in when i was trying to file..i didnt understand questions...when id ask lady she was nice but it was strange...i recall cause i gave fun fact to kids...i didnt understand lifting part...she said 2 gallen milk equals 8 pounds..and to go by if i could lift with one hand ...and i cant without hlep bending legs back using other hand etc...and she said make sure put number so i did...i think she was frustrated when i didnt know how much i could lift with one hand and guess that was her fun fact....others things i didnt understand well either but since i gave fun fact to kids i remember the milk thing...

    i didnt have anyone physically with me at time to fill out...but theyd give me number to call and gvie answers too...i dont understand alot of it and it probably has nothing to do with your post but made me think of it....cant remember what i did two minutes ago but i can tell you 2 gallon milk equals 8 pounds...lol
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page