New Green Paper Discussion - now includes accessible formats and consultation event sign up links!

19091929395

Comments

  • luvpink
    luvpink Online Community Member Posts: 2,004 Championing

    I have two long standing shoulder injuries and I can't reach behind my back but I'm having a problem how to get it across to them on the form that it prevents me washing my back and putting upper body clothes on.

    They have only given me 3 weeks to complete and return the form so I am aiming to send it on Friday and tell them I wave requested my medical records from my Doctor and I intend to send further evidence at a layer date.

    All this and I unwell at the moment.

  • sarah_lea12
    sarah_lea12 Online Community Member Posts: 331 Empowering

    They want us under stress and unwell, I hope you get a long award this time well into retirement . I also hope I get a long award into my retirement . I'm no good to any employer I have agoraphobia I'm nearly deaf and can hardly walk .

  • anon85
    anon85 Online Community Member Posts: 9 Listener

    With regards to lcwra, where do you find out if you were deemed " substantial risk " ?

  • WhatThe
    WhatThe Online Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 3,865 Championing
    edited 11:14AM

    MW, I am here trying to explain!

    I can't force anyone else to read and research how we got here but it remains everyone's responsibility to do so.

    Since you've asked again, in 2014 and 2015 I was panicking and sending emails to MP's and signing petitions just as people are doing now…

    Ps my first salaried job in London was a researcher for a publishing company. The work involved scouring microfiche at the original British Library for subject information. I can still only scan read. Making myself understood as an autistic person though is infinitely harder both orally and in text.

  • sarah_lea12
    sarah_lea12 Online Community Member Posts: 331 Empowering
  • Bluebell21
    Bluebell21 Online Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 11,072 Championing

    PIP shake -up will also look at eligibility of Carers Allowance. Has anyone written to their MP regarding this?

  • MW123
    MW123 Scope Member Posts: 1,142 Championing

    You’ve mentioned multiple times that you’ve spent years researching past welfare reforms and understand how we got to this point. But if you already have that knowledge, why aren’t you sharing it in a way that directly connects the past to the upcoming reforms in 2025?

    We don’t have time to go back and research everything ourselves, you have the information, so why not share it? Of course, only if it’s relevant to today. What we need is clear, actionable information that links what happened before to what’s happening now. The mistakes or issues from past reforms should be directly tied to the future plans so we can understand what’s at stake and how to prevent it from happening again.

    I understand that, as an autistic person, communicating your thoughts can sometimes be difficult, and I truly respect the effort you’ve put into your research. But if you’ve already done the work, sharing your findings could really help those of us who are trying to take action. Many of us face challenges too, and accessible, clear information is needed right now.

    If you truly want to make a difference (and I believe you do), stop asking others to play catch-up. Share what you know and show us how the past can inform what we do to fight the changes coming in 2025. Your research could help prevent further harm, but only if it’s shared in a way that helps us take action today, rather than just revisiting past grievances about policies and MPs that no longer directly impact the fight we face now.

  • calflye
    calflye Online Community Member Posts: 100 Empowering

    It would be in the decision letter. My decision letter for my UC WCA says I was awarded based on substantial risk

  • WhatThe
    WhatThe Online Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 3,865 Championing

    MW, I have on the forum and in PM's to you. I shall keep trying!

    Sorry that's not good enough for you.

  • Danny123
    Danny123 Online Community Member Posts: 28 Connected

    Forgive me if I'm wrong but hasn't that always been the case anyway .....that if your reassessed and you don't get awarded again you loose entitlement to the benefit you receive ? ..... Nothing has changed regarding that .... I'm saying that people in my situation of recieving esa and lcwra but NOT PIP would still be reassessed under the wca even if we are reassessed AFTER November 2026 , as the new criteria that kicks in then is only for claimants that receive PIP .... People that don't receive it will continue to be reassessed through wca until it's abolishment on 2028 when the new pip criteria will take over for everyone else as well ....

    That's what I was saying previously , I'm just concentrating on passing that assessment as long as I do things will stay the same and then I'll deal with the new criteria when it comes

    Like I say technically I've never been assessed for lcwra , my last reassessment was for ESA , it was November 2019 and I was due another in 2021 , so it will be 6 years in November since I've had one and will be 4 overdue

    I voullentatrlly moved to UC in 2022 so technically I've never been assessed for UC , I was automatically given lcwra because of my support group status , I was of the impression that the uc50 is the same as the ESA50 in regards to questions and descriptors so it's no different to the ESA50 I've always filled in before , and the uc50 covers both the cbesa part of my claim as well as the lcwra part

    It was all the mentioning of being assessed under the new 2016 reforms that completely threw me , are these somehow different from what I've always been used too ? Very confusing

  • Bluebell21
    Bluebell21 Online Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 11,072 Championing

    Can I ask again please? I do not want my post to get lost.

  • MW123
    MW123 Scope Member Posts: 1,142 Championing

    This is my understanding after reading the new changes. If you don’t get PIP, you will still have the usual Work Capability Assessment when you’re reassessed, even after the new rules start in November 2026. You won’t have to do the PIP test unless you actually claim PIP. The WCA will keep being used for people not on PIP until 2028, and only after that will everyone move over to the new system based on the PIP assessment. So, for now and even after 2026, nothing changes for you unless you start claiming PIP.

  • Passerby
    Passerby Posts: 213 Empowering

    Please don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing at all with what you've saying, as they're true. But I don't think they're helpful in the current context or immediate situation.

  • anon85
    anon85 Online Community Member Posts: 9 Listener

    So I didn't get an award letter in the post for my lcwra claim, only a letter sent via email to be read via pdf. On that letter it simply stated I'd been found to have limited capability to work etc and there was no mention of substantial risk. So should I take that to mean, since there was no mention of this, that I didn't fall into the substantial risk category? If so, is this a good thing or bad thing, in light of the new welfare proposals?

  • MW123
    MW123 Scope Member Posts: 1,142 Championing

    This isn’t about whether it’s ‘good enough’ for me, it’s about ensuring the research you have done is actually useful to the community. You have spoken a lot about your years of studying past welfare reforms, but instead of sharing clear connections to the 2025 changes, you have encouraged others to do their own research.

    I have genuinely tried to find these links myself and have struggled to see how they relate. If those connections do exist, it would be really helpful if you could present them clearly rather than expecting people to search through years of past policies.

    I have made an effort to understand your perspective, but without clear explanations, it’s difficult to see the bigger picture. If there are truly relevant lessons from past reforms, now would be a great time to compile and share them in one post, so we can better understand how they might relate to the 2025 welfare reforms.

    This isn’t about debating for the sake of it or sending people on a never ending search, it’s about ensuring that your knowledge is accessible and actionable. We are dealing with serious issues that affect real lives, and time is of the essence.

  • WhatThe
    WhatThe Online Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 3,865 Championing

    You keep misunderstanding. The days and weeks I recently spent reading, copying and pasting to you left me quite unwell. Any length of time online makes me ill. I'm not complaining but I must also look after my own needs (limitations).

    Those years were spent just about hanging on and reading in the hope of one day understanding what they were doing !!!

    When I joined the forum less than two years ago, I had to battle you and others telling me I was wrong, posting misleading information and scaremongering 🙄

    I couldn't articulate more than a sentence back then and I'm still learning how to explain the scam and how to make this palatable. People don't want bad news but I can't dress this up.

  • judie
    judie Online Community Member Posts: 321 Empowering

    Go online and look up DWP Right of Access. There is a very simple form to fill out and within a month they have to send you the information you've asked for. You'll need your NI number. Good luck

  • judie
    judie Online Community Member Posts: 321 Empowering
    edited 4:29PM

    I don't know myself but you're right, it's an important part of the planned changes. Hopefully someone can help you @Bluebell21

  • Fuzzy200
    Fuzzy200 Online Community Member Posts: 10 Listener

    This makes intreasting reading. Keep the pressure up on Labours MPs.

    https://liveapp.inews.co.uk/category/3676243/content.html

  • MW123
    MW123 Scope Member Posts: 1,142 Championing

    Let me be absolutely clear, you approached me, not the other way around. I responded to your repeated requests with respect and diligence, investing my time to assist you just as I would for anyone seeking help in good faith. As someone who is also disabled, I want to make it clear that providing this support required significant effort on my part, including hours spent trawling through government archives to help you.

    Confidentiality is not a convenience, it is a core value I uphold without compromise. I honoured your request for privacy completely. Yet now, you have chosen to betray that trust by publicly distorting our private exchange, twisting the facts to suit your narrative. This is not only a violation of our agreement it is a deliberate attempt to mislead others and damage my reputation. I can only assume this is because I could not find anything to support the claims you were making.

    I have nothing to hide. I fully support a transparent review of our private correspondence by the moderators. The truth is on my side, and the record will expose your claims for what they are: baseless and unjust.

    I will not allow anyone to weaponise my goodwill or undermine my character. I stand firm in the knowledge that I acted with honesty, discretion, and respect. Your actions speak for themselves and so will the facts.