Would you accept having your bank account checked?

Rosie_Scope

Hi @Tonawanda17, I can't say for certain what kind of change, but we are due a General Election so there is likely to be some form of change in government next year. From what I gather, the deadline to hold a General Election is January 2025 so it could happen any time before that. Whether this policy makes it in before that I can't say, we'll keep an eye on the news over the next few weeks and months. 

There is also likely to be a lot of these kinds of discussions on policy floating around the press as the main parties decide what will make people more likely to vote them in. It could be quite a stressful time for people who are already struggling, which is why its so important to be mindful of others as these stories come out. 

Tonawanda17

Hi Rosie. Thanks very much. I guess the other thing is don’t believe all you read in the papers

2oldcodgers

Tonawanda17 said:

Hi Rosie. Are you saying it’s possible we might get a new government before it’s implemented? Let’s all vote labour. It’s time for change

Is that the best way to view one party over the other?
All I will say is to be careful what you vote for. Labour are committed also to saving money - they can't spend what they don't have. They have promised to be  financially aware and to ensure that they don't borrow  to fund  changes.

2oldcodgers

Ralph said:

Surely all benefits need to be applied for and are reviewed regularly. So if you don’t need or want the benefits don’t apply for them and when they are reviewed don’t reapply. The rest of us need the money and have to jump through the hoops to receive them.

But, and I have said this before, I do need the benefit as without it I would not be able to have a Motability car.
As for the care element, I don't have any care needs that have to be funded by that benefit. All of my needs are provided free of charge via my wife and my two daughters.
I suppose I could spend it on having a holiday abroad every year costing £5252 like some others that do, but I cannot leave the UK due to not being able to access travel insurance.
Maybe I could get a new electronic drum set and amplifier & speakers which is my musical instrument that I have played since I was 15 much like others do.
But are those related in any way to the extra costs that I incur due to my disability?

poppy123456

2oldcodgers said:

Ralph said:

Surely all benefits need to be applied for and are reviewed regularly. So if you don’t need or want the benefits don’t apply for them and when they are reviewed don’t reapply. The rest of us need the money and have to jump through the hoops to receive them.

Maybe I could get a new electronic drum set and amplifier & speakers which is my musical instrument that I have played since I was 15 much like others do.
But are those related in any way to the extra costs that I incur due to my disability?

Yet you actually give your money away. I’m sure you do all of this just to annoy people. 

apple85

https://www.bigissue.com/opinion/dwp-check-claimants-bank-accounts-disabled-people/

OverlyAnxious

I don't really understand all the 2oldcodger bashing in this thread.  They do have a way of writing that comes across a bit blunt, but I don't think their views are any less valid.

I'm in a similar position of now having too much income.  The reason for that is because I became housebound after years of declining health.  I now have absolutely no travel costs because I can't go anywhere.  And bizarrely that entitles me to an extra £100 a month of PIP!  Yet I couldn't claim for any mobility costs when I could still just drive locally.  You couldn't make it up...

Of course, I'm also not using as much of the other income as before, so I am getting extra capital at the end of each payment period.  This causes me more stress than when I didn't have enough income!  The number on my bank statement is just that, a number, it doesn't give me access to anything more than it did before.  So why should that make the stress I feel for having too much income any less relevant than the stress others feel for having too little income?  This is meant to be an inclusive forum after all, not just one for people with a low income.  I know there are others on here in a similar position as well, who I've seen told they should be 'grateful' for that situation.

As has been pointed out, you can't choose which parts of PIP you want to keep.  And with PIP being a gateway benefit, we do need at least part of it to access other benefits.  In my case, one-bed LHA instead of shared rate.  And in 2OC's case, the Motability scheme.

Should I be offended and feel it's incentive of other members to boast about how they can access doctors and hospitals and dental treatment?  I can't access of any of those things, despite having more income than them.  But I accept that's my problem, whatever they can or can't do isn't really relevant to my situation.

Please have a bit more thought for everyone on the forum, not just those you perceive to be in a 'worse' situation based on your own prejudices. 

Bettahm

apple85 said:

https://www.bigissue.com/opinion/dwp-check-claimants-bank-accounts-disabled-people/

The govt are trying to turn the public, the 'taxpayer ' against disabled people and those struggling with mh issues.
It's like something out of the Victorian era. 

JessieJ

Bettahm said:

apple85 said:

https://www.bigissue.com/opinion/dwp-check-claimants-bank-accounts-disabled-people/

The govt are trying to turn the public, the 'taxpayer ' against disabled people and those struggling with mh issues.
It's like something out of the Victorian era. 

Yep! With disabled now coming under UC hasn't helped the situation. The comments I've read from all sorts of folk, but a lot of pensioners, is, we're all scroungers, along with the work shy unemployed. They also forget that those working but on a low wage are on UC too.

apple85

OverlyAnxious said:

I'm in a similar position of now having too much income.  The reason for that is because I became housebound after years of declining health.  I now have absolutely no travel costs because I can't go anywhere.  And bizarrely that entitles me to an extra £100 a month of PIP!  Yet I couldn't claim for any mobility costs when I could still just drive locally.  You couldn't make it up...

Of course, I'm also not using as much of the other income as before, so I am getting extra capital at the end of each payment period.  This causes me more stress than when I didn't have enough income!  The number on my bank statement is just that, a number, it doesn't give me access to anything more than it did before.  So why should that make the stress I feel for having too much income any less relevant than the stress others feel for having too little income?  This is meant to be an inclusive forum after all, not just one for people with a low income.  I know there are others on here in a similar position as well, who I've seen told they should be 'grateful' for that situation.

As has been pointed out, you can't choose which parts of PIP you want to keep.  And with PIP being a gateway benefit, we do need at least part of it to access other benefits.  In my case, one-bed LHA instead of shared rate.  And in 2OC's case, the Motability scheme.

Should I be offended and feel it's incentive of other members to boast about how they can access doctors and hospitals and dental treatment?  I can't access of any of those things, despite having more income than them.  But I accept that's my problem, whatever they can or can't do isn't really relevant to my situation.

Please have a bit more thought for everyone on the forum, not just those you perceive to be in a 'worse' situation based on your own prejudices. 

I’ve had both extremes with the welfare systems (poverty and excess) over the years

both hold their own stresses but I do understand that those on this forum really struggling don’t want to hear about the cons of too much welfare (many of you probably think guilt is a small price for knowing that you have enough money to survive that week)

what I do know is that you don’t go into a welfare assessment or review with the aim to undershoot - everyone on this forum knows how challenging the whole process to get a sickness welfare benefit is and you should always aim to get as high an award as possible (based on truthful writeup and evidence of cause of cause)……….in very rare cases that can mean an individual gets an higher award than needed (I say rare as the uk welfare system is much less than many other countries especially with all the freezes over the last 15 years never caught up on - often not rising with inflation)

so yes being ‘over successful’ in welfare assessments can be stressful but considering a huge amount of forum members would kill to have those stresses I would read the room and just say that you’re lucky & thankful and leave it at that


but back to the topic of the forum a policy like this is implemented is an invasion of privacy (which falls into human right), it’s treating every claimant as possibly guilty of fraud before proven otherwise, and would require a massive amount of dwp staff or ai to carry out which is unrealistic (plus the dwp have a record of security breaches of claimant data - so a huge legal issue……….especially when benefit fraud is a very small number of claims)

apple85

2oldcodgers said:

But the difference between you and I then is that I get it but don't need it? Maybe the answer is that ALL benefits and welfare payments should be means tested.

 That would save a fortune for the government. And while I am thinking about it that would include the State Pension which is paid to many when they clearly don't need it.

 What is saved by this scheme could be used to to pay others a guaranteed and universal wage if they earn less that say £15 an hour. 

That’s a terrible idea

There are many disabled who are in work and are only able to do so because PIP is not means tested

if PIP goes means tested it would not surprise me if those disabled in the workplace would no longer be able to financially justify working.


and those who get state pension get it because they have contributed ni throughout their working lives - they get it fair and square and even though I’d hope the multi millionaire pensioners would make weekly donations to the food banks they’ve earns the right to decide for themselves 

there are ways for the gov to save money whilst not penalising the disabled and I personally don’t think your suggestion is one of them, sorry!

nciae7777

Absolutely NOT. This is breach of privacy.  When will people learn that there will ALWAYS be people who will use these laws to harm you. Anyone naive enough to say "I have nothing to hide so I don't object to it", what about when they tell you they need to put cameras into your rooms at home to monitor you,  then it will be to monitor your children and then it will be using the toilet and water responsibly....when will people wake up and realise this is just a tactic to abuse and harrass the weakest and vunerable of society. 

nciae7777

Absolutely NOT. Did anyome who does not object read George Orwell 1984? If not you ought to because there are many people in governments who want people at the bottom to suffer and be subjected to harassment and being spied on. Can peope not see how crazy the world has become with technology and how it is being used to spy on people whilst they also keep adding harmful chaos and divide into all walks of society. People must petition and challenge these shocking and alarming ideas. When will people learn that there will ALWAYS be people who will use these laws to harm you. Anyone naive enough to say "I have nothing to hide so I don't object to it", what about when they tell you they want to look and make sure youre not spending your money on things the goverment decides you are not enitled to buy or they need to put cameras into your rooms at home to monitor you,  then it will be to monitor your children and then it will be using the toilet and water responsibly....when will people wake up and realise this is just a tactic to abuse and harrass the weakest and vunerable of society. 

apple85

Tonawanda17 said:

Hi Rosie. Are you saying it’s possible we might get a new government before it’s implemented? Let’s all vote labour. It’s time for change

Honestly I’m hoping for a labour - Lib Dem coalition 

for a start labour aren’t the strategic vote everywhere (esp after the events of this week)

second is I’ve heard some good things from the current Lib Dem constituencies (there’s so few of them that they don’t take their seats for granted……….unlike some Tory mp lifers that will remain nameless)

lastly in recent weeks a few Lib Dem’s mps have given reaction quotes to all the recent dwp stuff that is somewhat empathetic towards what this could mean for the disabled (as has a few snp mps if I’m being fair)

in comparison the shadow work and pensions minister liz Kendall is happy to criticise the tories but has shown zero compassion and concern for the disabled and doesn’t even acknowledge us.

as a disabled person I would only recommend voting labour if that is the strategic vote for your constituency in the upcoming general election (Tory’s out at all costs)
- if starmer in the meantime has another reshuffle and replaces Kendall with someone like Reynolds or Nandy then I may change my recommendation but right now it’s tactically voting all the way (don’t spoil your votes ppl)

Community_Scope

Note from online community team:

Hello everyone,

We want this discussion to continue, but we’re concerned that things are becoming quite tense and could easily escalate.

Please remember that all discussions on Scope’s online community should remain civil, supportive, and safe.

We will continue to closely monitor this discussion, but if it escalates further, we may choose to pause, close, or even hide the discussion.

For more information, please read our online community house rules.

Tonawanda17

Does anyone watch the parliamentary debates. I don’t but someone on here last week said this would need to got through the House of Lords first? (I could wrong here). 

apple85

Tonawanda17 said:

Does anyone watch the parliamentary debates. I don’t but someone on here last week said this would need to got through the House of Lords first? (I could wrong here). 

I don’t know what others are doing but I’m personally going to be keeping an eye on the political live texts from the chancellor’s statement on Wednesday and post on the thread I started ages back on the welfare and finance subsection of the scope forum

im actually not going to be posting direct quotes from the chancellor on a asap basis as very little detail is actually given in the speak itself and Jeremy hunt is a scaremonger 

im going to wait for the gov to post the complete pdf doc of the autumn statement which will be published online after the speech, read through it and post (highlighted) screenshots of the parts that may affect the disabled community 

I will also post any disability supportive quotes from mps in the following commons discussion (and from lords) - I honestly think it could be a tough day and if there are any politicians advocating for us I think it’s a nice thing to know

(on that subject there’s a lord called Jenny Jones who seems to have her head screwed on - look her up on Twitter……………I got a feeling the disabled community in the coming weeks may be thankful that the House of Lords exist - they’re overpaid but mostly seem to respect human rights, more than mp’s anyway)

on your other question yesterdays news drop (what are we calling it - the snowplough to employment policy?) has thrown for a loop as that sound like it’s already been implemented, no bill or vote needed (we’ll probably know Wednesday)

for the other 2 policies of concern (the benefit fraud additional powers and the wca reforms - technically 2 separate policies as the dwp both want to alter and remove the wca in time so I’m referring to the recent consultation content alone here) on official government documents on both subjects they mention needing legislation or ‘legislative change’

in a lot of cases this refers to a parliamentary bill being needed (the one with the the readings and ping ponging with the House of Lords - may take a couple of months, may take over a year, may get stuck in limbo)
however I did recently find out legislation could also refer to an amendment to an existing act/law (ie a past bill already given royal assent) which is a shorter, less complex process in comparison to a totally new bill

a lot will also depend on the govs priority on all this -  that will affect the speed at which the gov try’s to push it through (public backlash and possible legal cases may also slow things down which is why I’ve been telling this community to get noisy and research ways to fight/push back)

we don’t have many answers yet know but we should have more info by this time next week

Tonawanda17

Hi, thanks for your reply. I can see a lot of backlash from disability groups on the wca and the bank accounts 

Tonawanda17

wouldn't be surprised if someone challanges them either

WhatThe

How might people on this forum feel if I began crowing about the weights I lifted this morning? Or the fantastic results of my recent NHS MOT?

It's insensitive to boast about how well looked after you are