Disabled couple snooped on and accused of fraud by the DWP

[Ayahuasca]

Although not as prevalent, there is also the other end of the scale where people who are too honest, stubborn or don't want the label continue to work with a disability when they really shouldn't, as it only further damages their health and in some cases is a danger to others around them.

 

[n111ck]

Many people can’t work due to pain. There is no obvious test for pain, that’s why doctors ask you to rate your pain on a scale of 1-10. If someone says they’re in pain, you can’t just call them liars.

So are you saying that anyone that says they are in pain should get benefits?

 

[TheLegendOfMart]

I'm not a doctor s couldnt comment but as i said benefits should be a last resort - if someone is genuinely unable to work then thats what benefits exist for.

Hes been unemployed approximately 6 months since he was 16 until he had a stroke. He's more than paid into the system all his life. Expecting someone who had a stroke, weakeness, dementia to work instead of enjoying what little life he has left is disgusting.

We are in this mess because seemingly anyone can get benefits…

Shows what little you know of the benefits system. I've had to fight for his benefits constantly.

For example in his last assessment the lady held her hand up in my face and told me to be quiet because she needs to hear the answers in my dads words. Except my dad has ******* vascular dementia and can't remember a lot of stuff who then denied him the benefits he had already been getting because she said he didn't appear to have any problems.

 

[n111ck]

Well, apparently they can't, because cases of benefit fraud aren't the DWP's biggest problem.

It seems more likely that you've bought into the Daily Mail spiel about every man and his dog claiming benefits for bad backs etc.

In future, it might be best to start out from a position of honesty if you want a debate instead of making **** up. I'm still interested to hear what these fairly obvious and simple tests are that you've devised to categorically say whether someone is really able to work or not.

If you really believe that 100% of the 1 in 10 people claiming disability benefits are genuine then you better suck it up because the situation is not going to get any better.. weeding out the scroungers is the only way to system can improve.

 

[Ayahuasca]

If you really believe that 100% of the 1 in 10 people claiming disability benefits are genuine then you better suck it up because the situation is not going to get any better.. weeding out the scroungers is the only way to system can improve.

Never made that claim, but nice straw man as usual from you.

I see you still haven't answered the more pressing question.

 

[robfosters]

So are you saying that anyone that says they are in pain should get benefits?

No, but if they have any kind of condition that can cause pain, then you can only go by what they say their pain is like.

 

[n111ck]

Hes been unemployed approximately 6 months since he was 16 until he had a stroke. He's more than paid into the system all his life. Expecting someone who had a stroke, weakeness, dementia to work instead of enjoying what little life he has left is disgusting.


Shows what little you know of the benefits system. I've had to fight for his benefits constantly.

As I said if someone is genuinely in need then they shoulds get benefits. The problem you have its that you are fighting the scroungers overloading the system.

 

[robfosters]

If you really believe that 100% of the 1 in 10 people claiming disability benefits are genuine then you better suck it up because the situation is not going to get any better.. weeding out the scroungers is the only way to system can improve.

You still haven’t explained how we can definitively “weed out the scroungers”

 

[n111ck]

No, but if they have any kind of condition that can cause pain, then you can only go by what they say their pain is like.

Well blame all the bad back scroungers for the reason why peoples word isnt enough any more..

 

[TheLegendOfMart]

As I said if someone is genuinely in need then they shoulds get benefits. The problem you have its that you are fighting the scroungers overloading the system.

No we aren't. Fraud is a single figure percentage of the overall benefits bill. Most of the welfare cost goes to pensions and in work benefits to top up wages because people aren't getting paid enough.

 

[n111ck]

You still haven’t explained how we can definitively “weed out the scroungers”

I dont need to - I'm not the DWP - the scroungers are making the situation worse for the genuine - if thats acceoptable to you then thats your opinion but you can cant then complain.

 

[SpellowHouse]

Fraud is about 4%, so 96% isn’t fraud.

Oh and try punching up rather than down!

I use the term "scroungers" to appease the people who get wound up by the few real scroungers. In truth, I think scroungers are a problem largely invented by the right wind media and used by the Conservatives to anger people and win votes. But, it still stands that highly unqualified people are processing claims.

I always remember the case of my brother. He had a stroke after diving and travelling by air. It completely crippled the right side of his body. He could just about walk, but his right hand was useless. He was right handed which made him completely crack-handed. He could barely do any task that required hands.

Par for the course, the government assessed his condition and declared him completely fit for work, ignoring his disability and the fact that he had never worked a day in an office and was now expected to. And as he said, sure, I could probably do something, but who the **** is going to give me a job?

He had paid National Insurance all his working life, but got absolutely nothing but contempt back.

 

[n111ck]

No we aren't. Fraud is a single figure percentage of the overall benefits bill. Most of the welfare cost goes to pensions and in work benefits to top up wages because people aren't getting paid enough.

So you are saying the current system is effective at combating fraud? Thats a good thing then, no?

 

[Ayahuasca]

So you are saying the current system is effective at combating fraud? Thats a good thing then, no?

You're the one who made the claim that it's fairly obvious and easy to test whether someone can work or not, so why don't you enlighten us on how we can effectively eradicate fraud?

 

[Kenai]

As I said if someone is genuinely in need then they shoulds get benefits. The problem you have its that you are fighting the scroungers overloading the system.

Are they actually 'overloading the system' though or are they a tiny minority being used as a political deflection? Does any of the available evidence (real evidence, not Daily Mail articles about scroungers) actually point to the former?

 

[robfosters]

I dont need to - I'm not the DWP - the scroungers are making the situation worse for the genuine - if thats acceoptable to you then thats your opinion but you can cant then complain.

No the fact is, you’re willing to run your mouth about things you know nothing about without being able to think of any suggestions on how to fix any problems that really just exist in your head.

 

[TheLegendOfMart]

So you are saying the current system is effective at combating fraud? Thats a good thing then, no?

No it's not. Its like using a flamethrower to kill weeds killing all the other plants in the process. There is no nuance with the government and it's assessments. Everyone is a "scrounger" until they try and prove themselves otherwise. Every bill, law, etc.. they bring out affects the 95% rather than the 5%. It is LITERALLY killing people either waiting for benefits or being forced to work when they can't.

 

[n111ck]

I use the term "scroungers" to appease the people who get wound up by the few real scroungers. In truth, I think scroungers are a problem largely invented by the right wind media and used by the Conservatives to anger people and win votes. But, it still stands that highly unqualified people are processing claims.

I always remember the case of my brother. He had a stroke after diving and travelling by air. It completely crippled the right side of his body. He could just about walk, but his right hand was useless. He was right handed which made him completely crack-handed. He could barely do any task that required hands.

Par for the course, the government assessed his condition and declared him completely fit for work, ignoring his disability and the fact that he had never worked a day in an office and was now expected to. And as he said, sure, I could probably do something, but who the **** is going to give me a job?

What doesnt make sense is that if someone is as injured as that cant get benefits how messed up must the 1 in 10 people that can get them be? Surely they must all be in a worse condition but that's not something I recognise from the average high street..

 

[n111ck]

No the fact is, you’re willing to run your mouth about things you know nothing about without being able to think of any suggestions on how to fix any problems that really just exist in your head.

If you are happy with the status quo thats your opinion - just dont expect it to get any better.

 

[n111ck]

No it's not. Its like using a flamethrower to kill weeds killing all the other plants in the process. There is no nuance with the government and it's assessments. Everyone is a "scrounger" until they try and prove themselves otherwise. Every bill, law, etc.. they bring out affects the 95% rather than the 5%. It is LITERALLY killing people either waiting for benefits or being forced to work when they can't.

...and yet 1 in 10 are on disability benefits..