The Autumn Statement 2023

carbow32

brandondreamer said:

carbow32 said:

"Active Psychosis" worries me a bit.  I am on a high dose of anti psychotic and as such I am not in active psychosis but even with the medication the pressures of employment would trigger an attack.  So would I have to go to work because my psychosis is not active, for it to become active to then go back into LCWRA to get well again .. can see a magic merry go round on the horizon.

This was in the guideline from the gov website. 

9. These changes will mean that almost all people who are currently assessed as having LCWRA will never face a WCA reassessment again. Reassessments will only take place under very limited circumstances, which are:

• When a claimant reports a change of circumstances in their health condition;
• If a claimant has been awarded LCWRA for pregnancy risk, or cancer treatment where the prognosis for recovery is expected to be short-term;
• If a claimant has been declared as having LCWRAunder the new risk provisions; and
• In cases of suspected fraud.

I think these new provisions will only affect new claimants however I still am very skeptical and untrusting of this government… 

Votadini said:

carbow32 said:

"Active Psychosis" worries me a bit.  I am on a high dose of anti psychotic and as such I am not in active psychosis but even with the medication the pressures of employment would trigger an attack.  So would I have to go to work because my psychosis is not active, for it to become active to then go back into LCWRA to get well again .. can see a magic merry go round on the horizon.

That only applies to a change to the 'substantial risk' descriptor in the WCA so will only effect assessments, and if I'm reading it right will also only apply to new claims.

Hope this helps.

I am in the substantial risk category .. I did read it as well for new claims (or are they missing out and reassessments)

brandondreamer

Aren’t we predicted to get a new government by the time these new guidelines are enforced? 

I don’t know how government policy works and if these kind of things continue when we get a new government but it just seems rather stupid? Like these kind of policies won’t attract new voters, rather quite the opposite…

carbow32

Votadini said:

carbow32 said:

"Active Psychosis" worries me a bit.  I am on a high dose of anti psychotic and as such I am not in active psychosis but even with the medication the pressures of employment would trigger an attack.  So would I have to go to work because my psychosis is not active, for it to become active to then go back into LCWRA to get well again .. can see a magic merry go round on the horizon.

That only applies to a change to the 'substantial risk' descriptor in the WCA so will only effect assessments, and if I'm reading it right will also only apply to new claims.

Hope this helps.

I am in the substantial risk category .. I did read it as well for new claims (or are they missing out and reassessments)

carbow32

Okay that's fine by me no WCA again but still a scenario the future generation will face.

I guess then it would be a work coach at some point in time will pop up and want me to work from home.

Remina

To echo what Meg said, my question regarding the 'substantial risk' descriptor being changed, will that seriously mean that in the future it will only be applied for people experiencing 'active psychosis'? 

I find it deeply worrying if that is indeed what's going to happen, I mean, aside from the fact that the change to the rule would ignore all the other myriad of valid mental health issues that could lead to the risk of a person's life ending, I feel that somebody who is for example severely depressed and actively thinking of ending their own life should without a doubt be considered ''substantial risk', I can't think of a more 'substantial risk' than someone who is actively considering suicide.

I guess I just feel the proposed change to the substantial risk rules to only include 'active psychosis' would be hugely dangerous.

poppy123456

Votadini said:

poppy123456 said:

I disagree, sorry. That’s actually nothing new because permitted work rules say you can work less than 16 hours. If they work 16 hours or more then entitlement to ESA ends. To get around this they can claim UC while still claiming ESA and remain working less than 16 hours per week.

As they are transferring from ESA their UC would honour that, so if they are in the Support Group they would be entitled to the LCWRA element from the start of their claim. Which means they do not need to go through another WCA. 

They would also be entitled to the work allowance, which means a certain amount of earnings received each month will be ignored before any deductions apply. 

Permitted work rules apply to all ESA whether that’s contributions based, New style or Income Related. 

Of course someone claiming either contributions based or New style ESA whether theres any entitlement to UC will depend on their circumstances. 

Nonetheless, if a claimant on IRESA doesn't make a UC claim the guarantee that is being offered to them is much more limited than for UC or CBESA claimants. UC claimants will be able to reclaim without penalty within 6 months, for new style and CBESA it's 12 weeks. Both can work unlimited hours, whereas IRESA claimants will only be able to work the current permitted hours and if they are exceeded their claim will close with no recourse to reapplying.

CB ESA and New style ESA claimants definitely can't work unlimited hours without any affect on their ESA. The same permitted work rules apply as they do for IR ESA.

The 12 week rules you mentioned are known as linking rules, which have always applied. The reason they no longer apply to IR ESA is because this no longer exists for new claims and it would be UC they would need to claim. If their ESA ended before they claimed UC then yes they will need to go through the WCA process again.

Votadini

carbow32 said:

I am in the substantial risk category .. I did read it as well for new claims (or are they missing out and reassessments)

I went back and checked and it will only apply to new claims and not reassessments.

These changes will not affect existing claimants whose circumstances remain the same, reflecting the need to ensure a continuity of service for them, and will mean that these claimants will not lose money as a result of the changes.

So if you face an reassessment before 2025 the WCA descriptors will remain the same as they were for your previous assessments.

Meg24

Many in the current government are too influenced by the libertarian right and the policies in the USA, where it is almost a given that people with severe mental illness will end up destitute. They want the UK to head the same way, where the public are conditioned to believe that the only people deserving of decent state support are those who are only having a short break from being 'economically active' It's a very sorry state of affairs for this country. I fear for my daughter and future generations, they deserve better than this.

Votadini

poppy123456 said:

CB ESA and New style ESA claimants definitely can't work unlimited hours without any affect on their ESA. The same permitted work rules apply as they do for IR ESA.

The 12 week rules you mentioned are known as linking rules, which have always applied. The reason they no longer apply to IR ESA is because this no longer exists for new claims and it would be UC they would need to claim. If their ESA ended before they claimed UC then yes they will need to go through the WCA process again.

Yes you're absolutely right, I wasn't aware of the linking rules and got the wrong end of the stick. Thanks for putting me straight.

zane

Can you reply to my message I am ill I can’t f work because of my learning disability and mental health I am set lose my esa and pip next year or am I save I have memories problem part of my disability I get no tax credit so am I save or am I’m doom most people I really hate this government cut illness and kill innocent people than cutting the rich I am worried  

poppy123456

Votadini said:

poppy123456 said:

CB ESA and New style ESA claimants definitely can't work unlimited hours without any affect on their ESA. The same permitted work rules apply as they do for IR ESA.

The 12 week rules you mentioned are known as linking rules, which have always applied. The reason they no longer apply to IR ESA is because this no longer exists for new claims and it would be UC they would need to claim. If their ESA ended before they claimed UC then yes they will need to go through the WCA process again.

Yes you're absolutely right, I wasn't aware of the linking rules and got the wrong end of the stick. Thanks for putting me straight.

No problem at all, glad we got there in the end. Benefits are complicated and many people get very confused. Always happy to advise anyone that doesn't understand

poppy123456

zane said:

Can you reply to my message I am ill I can’t f work because of my learning disability and mental health I am set lose my esa and pip next year or am I save I have memories problem part of my disability I get no tax credit so am I save or am I’m doom most people I really hate this government cut illness and kill innocent people than cutting the rich I am worried  

Albus a member of the scope team replied on your thread earlier today. You can see their reply here. https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/112205/government-stop-benefits-next-year#latest

Your benefits are not going to be cut or stopped.

woodbine

My serious advice to everybody is not to worry until you have something to worry about, many of these proposed changes are going to take years to see the light of day, what I would suggest meanwhile is work out how much ££ the 6.7% increase in benefits will mean to you next April 💸 and see what happens when the mist clears.
This was supposed to be a statement for growth..it isn't, its just the tories re-arranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic.

Votadini

So the long and short of these proposals is if you have an existing LCWRA award then fight tooth and nail to cling on to it until 2025. For everyone else, most especially those with mental health conditions, things are about get a lot tougher.

Of course none of this could happen if/when Labour win the next election. But with Liz Kendall in shadow Work & Pensions to say my expectations are low is a considerable understatement.

mason50

I’m in esa support group and haven’t moved over to UC yet I also get tax credits . Will I still have the LCWRA when I move over to UC ? I thought that will eventually go or have I got confused . 

poppy123456

mason50 said:

I’m in esa support group and haven’t moved over to UC yet I also get tax credits . Will I still have the LCWRA when I move over to UC ? I thought that will eventually go or have I got confused . 

Yes, you will be entitled to the LCWRA element of UC from the start of your claim. If any part of your ESA is contributions based then this will continue but be deducted in full from any UC entitlement.

mason50

Thanks poppy I think I’m just getting confused with it all . I’m not sure if it’s contributions based . How can I find this out please ? 

poppy123456

mason50 said:

Thanks poppy I think I’m just getting confused with it all . I’m not sure if it’s contributions based . How can I find this out please ? 

If you're in the Support Group and you receive more than £129.50/week then at least part of it will be Income Related. Either way, it doesn't really matter because you're claiming Tax credits so you will be migrated across to UC at some point soon.

If it's part contributions based then £129.50/week will continue as normal but be deducted in full from any UC entitlement.

carbow32

I am so confused here reading this.  I am currently LCWRA.  Does this mean I won't face reassessment again at all or I might up until 2025 but it will be with the descriptors as they currently are ?  

mason50

I receive £450 esa every 2 weeks . Does that mean I will get the new esa when I move over to UC ?