Why would your housemate agree to a couple claim?

It hasn't been thought through very well, one issue is it basically removes working tax credits and replaces it with....very little. I can't see that it does encourage work - especially self employed work, which is well supported by the current tax credits system.

I've never had a problem with writing it - though I would often write something like 'on their best day they can only walk 30 metres' - it gives a really good idea to the decision maker what the range of activity is - but I always qualify with how many 'best' or 'good' days they have. If someone talks about good or bad days, then isn't specific about how often they occur - then yes there can be problems. Decision makers are well aware that what is a good day for a disabled person is very different than what it is for a healthy able bodied person.

I suspect that making it so difficult to get a recorded assessment is to make people give in and have the unrecorded assessment.

Yes, some organisations will tell you to write about your worst days - because that is the easiest way to write the form. Its much harder to describe variability, but if you describe your worst day - and you only have days like that once a week or fortnight, then yes, you would be commiting fraud. If you have the days you describe the majority of the time - say 5 days out of 7 then there would not be a problem. However, when completing a form for someone, I've always used the extra information to explain about good days and bad days - for instance 'on a bad day mrs x can only walk a few steps, on an average day 20 metres, on a good day maybe 50 metres - good days only occur once or twice a month, bad days about once a week, the rest are average days'. But yes, nystagmite is right, you're not supposed to just put down what happens on your worst day - good grief some people might only have their worst day once a month.

I suspect that fewer people will be better off under UC.

she won't owe more by appealing - there are no court costs involved in appeals, so whoever told her that is very much mistaken.

You'd be protected under transitional arrangements, but someone in your position, not protected, would have to stay on UC until both are of an age to receive pension credit.

Yes, this type of scheme was what ESA was supposed to be about - actually helping people back into work and getting them priority help. My worry is that the tide is turning. The funding will no longer be there for the best parts of the schemes, and other parts of the scheme may be .....misused to suit the current government agenda. When I first heard about ESA, in the planning stages, I was so optimistic - there was talk of things like counselling, CBT, priority access to pain clinics, funding for skills retraining and education for those on WRAG....but again an intial good idea was mutilated and misused to end up with what ESA currently is. So for me it isn't such a jump to belive that other schemes will be mutilated in a similar way. maybe I'm just too cynical. I know someone who still has mental health issues, but was helped back to work by his employer's back to work scheme which assessed him and offered him a course of CBT to help with stress and agoraphobia, and he was able to return to work before having to take an ESA ATOS assessment. So I'm well aware of the benefits that the right type of scheme can offer. But for him there was no pressure to return to work, no targets or monetary compensation for getting him back to work, except for the employer and him.

You may be right, but my understanding was it was being trialled as part of the 'fit to work' programme in selected areas. But I could well be wrong - hope I am. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/health-work-and-well-being/our-work/fit-for-work-services/ ETA: as an example http://www.leicesterfit4work.org.uk/_HEALTHCAREPROFESSIONALS.aspx

This is where I read about it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/nov/19/sick-leave-independent-assessors-report

I like the way you think speedfreek.

We would be significantly worse off on universal credit were we not to be protected by transition arrangements. The reasons being: If one partner gets cont based ESA and the other gets working tax credits, they're basically screwed. Cont based ESA will be deducted at 100%, there are no working tax credit elements so instead there will just be the small proportion of 'couple allowance' left after cont based ESA is deducted. Also you can't get a carer element and a LCWRA element for the same person, whereas now you can. Many disabled couples are eachother's carers, so the most vulnerable will be losing out. Also no SDP's in UC. In addition, carers allowance is still deducted 100% from universal credit. Not to mention self employed people will be considered to have a minimum income, even if they aren't earning that much yet, once they're past the start up period.

Indeed, and will be used to great effect to find that most people will be capable of some work activity. Sick and disabled people to be used to increase profits of private companies. Nice. Dance monkey dance.

What I posted wasn't an ideal world, it was a nightmare. The DDA and the newer equality act mean that you can't be forced to do something the assessment says you are unable to, HOWEVER, the nightmare that I'm trying to get across is that the ATOS assessments will be used against claimants in a new way, to ensure that they can still be strong armed into 'work activity' under penalty of sanction. The new 'tactic' by ATOS assessors will be that if they have to pass someone as unfit to work, to do it with as few points as possible to make the person look as capable as possible while still 'unfit'. So people might find they only have physical issues looked at - and it gives them enough points for WRAG but mental health points are neglected, making a person seem far more capable than they actually are. I'm saying people WILL be put into inappropriate placements, and the difficulty is, when a person first gets put into WRAG they won't even think to appeal, unless they request a copy of their assessment, they won't even know what they've been scored on....and what they haven't. Then when they are told by the work programme adviser that the assessment finds them capable of doing x,y and z and that they have to comply or lose benefit, they won't have a clue what to do. Will they be told their appeal rights? Will they even know what they should be appealing? Legal aid won't be available, there will be very few places to turn. Certainly NOT an ideal world.

I think you misunderstood what I said. imagine someone with rheumatoid arthritis, they have scord 18 points - 6 for mobilising less than 200 metres, 6 for not reaching their hands above their heads, 6 for not being able to move an empty cardboard box. Now this person may well have intense pain, fatigue due to arthritis, side effects from medication and maybe should have scored more points - maybe even 15 points for not being able to mobilise 50 metres, which would have put them in the support group, however they are so happy to have 'passed' the assessment, they don't even think about appealling. then comes the first work programme appointment, and they find that they're expected to do work experience at a shop on a till, because their 'assessment' has decided that they they are capable of doing that. No longer will we JUST have to worry about scoring enough points, we will also have to worry about fighting for every descriptor that we believe applies to us - because otherwise we'll be considered to be capable of it. people will be appealling their descriptors in WRAG with no hope of getting into support group - just so that they're not forced into a completely inappropriate 'work placement'. Maybe I didn't explain myself well. Sorry.

Aren't they bringing in that GP's can only sign people off for 4 weeks and then people have to be signed off by a DWP doc. I think they're piloting it at the moment.

The reality will be that no one can be forced to do something that Atos has assessed them as not being able to do - they cannot say you cannot do something on one hand, then expect you to do it. What I expect will happen is that work programme providers will get more detailed info on capabilities, and then will try to shoehorn some type of 'work experience' into the person's capabilities. I expect many appeals. I actually have no issue with someone being asked to consider a little voluntary work if they are capable of doing it. But I don't believe it should be manadatory on WRAG, and I am very much against benefit claimants being made to do unpaid work for profit making companies. I just hope that I'm well enough by next April (my next assessment date) to be able to do some part time freelance benefit work. I expect once the legal aid bill goes through there'll be a need for freelancers charging minimal fees, especially with all the changes going through and the need for people to have help and representation.

1 Depends if your old claim is suspended or cancelled - suspended, no, cancelled yes. 2 Fill in a new claim form 3 DWP don't award HB, the LA do. And no they don't have to give you the benefit, if the same circumstances exist as brought about the investigation and cancelled the previous claim, they probably won't.

If your sister is the one who cares for you then it can't hurt for her to provide a letter detailing the help she gives on a typicalling night - what help, when, how often, and for how long. I know that in some cases there is little the medical profession can do, but the DWP tend to be more skeptical of severe issues without a lot of GP involvement, or preferably a consultant's involvement. For the future you may want to 'go through the process' so at least your issues are recorded and treatments that have failed are detailed.

Althouigh they can take your award away its very unlikely for the DWP to do it during a reconsideration or appeal - when there is more risk is at Tribunal. You can ask for a reconsideration, and if there is no change you can then ask for an appeal. You can withdraw the appeal in writing at any time before the Tribunal. In your reconsideration detail what day or night needs you have in diary form, ie: 2.05am - needed help to get to the toilet and back (10 mins) 5am - incontinent in bed, needed help with washing, cleaning and changing bedclothes (20mins) Give them examples of what happens on an average day and/or night. For night time care to be awarded, you need to show that you need assistance at least twice during the night or for at least 20 minutes, or need continual supervision. For daytime care, you need to show that you need frequent help during day at least 5-10 seperate episodes, or that you need continual supervision. If its supervision that you need, then you need to give examples of what happens if you are left alone and what the repercussions are. Also what the pperson with you has to do while supervising you.

Its a difficult situation - private renting with bad credit history, and something really needs to be done about the credit checking policy. We faced a similar issue renting, and ended up not going through an agent, but going through the private 'property to rent' adds in the paper. Some will still want to credit check, we found one who didn't - but they still wanted evidence we could pay the rent, luckily we were both working. With an agent your options are to pay an additional amount upfront (this is at the discretion of the landlord to accept the arrangement) - sometimes up to 6 month's rent, or you could find someone who is working, with a good credit history, to be a guarantor - you would have to pay extra admin fees to have them checked out. Regarding how much rent you'd get help with, this depends on other things too - for instance how many bedrooms the house has and what the local housing allowance is for your area, and also exactly what your income is.

Of course this could be a cheeky way of delaying appeals: claimant appeals saying the Atos made mistakes. Just before Tribunal DWP say 'we agree ATOS made a mistake in your case - here's a new assessment', but of course if you fail the WCA the appeal process starts again, so greater delay. I've been thinking about this and if it were me I would do all of these things: Complete the ESA50 (you don't want your current ESA stopping, as Margaret points out) Make a complaint to DWP stating their decision hasn't been properly explained and you want a written statement of reasons. Appeal the decision, stating that you wish to continue on to Tribunal - on the grounds that you want a Tribunal to decide your capabilities on the date you were previously assessed, as the dWP seem to be unable to do this and assign you to WRAG or support group. Contact your MP and detail situation, giving copies of relevant paperwork.

From what I can remember questions about selling property have been on there for many years, its not a new question. In fact I think it used to ask if you've sold a property in the last two years.

Were these what you were referring to? http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/breaking-news-possible-new-wca.html?spref=tw