LCWRA Reviews

Asia23

Thanks for the link to the petition @davidpnuk

davidpnuk

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1037248#Comment_1037248

We need to get this to 10,000 or more please share the petition.

Passerby

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1037247#Comment_1037247

They've said they'll start with people with short term awards and those on substantial risk from April 2026, and then will roll out on to the rest as they build up capacity. Therefore, at least until April 2026 we're spared from this stressful and degrading assessment.

We often read that people are not being called for WCA reassessment due to the existence of a huge backlog. This is not quite true.

WCA reassessments have been paused since the pandemic, but have restarted last year, reassessing mainly people who were awarded LCWRA via phone assessment, rather than face to face assessment due to Covid restrictions, in order for them to have a full assessment.

The pause was based on policy rather than lack of capacity. We've to understand that assessments are conducted by profit making private companies paid in relation with the number of assessments they conduct; hence the higher the number of claimants they assess, the more money they make.

Asia23

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1037315#Comment_1037315

That's interesting @Passerby. I had no idea. I always read they were suspended because the assessment providers lacked capacity to tackle LCWRA reassessments because they were lower priority whilst dealing with new claims and LCW reassessments or deterioration (change of circumstances).

I am comforted to know that I will be spared reassessment before next April, then. Unfortunately, my claim is one of those initially targeted groups - 'substantial risk'.

I was told by an ESA telephony agent recently because I asked (whilst I'm in the midst of migrating to UC) that my next review date is due at the end of this summer. Do you know what happens when ESA migrate my details across to UC with that review date? Is it entered on their IT build? Is it automatically actioned or does it need manual intervention? Thanks for any insight, if you have it.

davidpnuk

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1037332#Comment_1037332

That isn't written in stone but April 2026 is a long way off and who knows what things will be like by then my guess the backlog may be worse other cuts announced will affect dwp employees this may cause dwp workers to strike.

Passerby

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1037332#Comment_1037332

While on ESA, it's automatically actioned but followed contemporaneous policies in vigour. While on UC, a work coach can also action it manually, this being the reason why I've never bothered to migrate voluntarily to UC to date, even though I would get £173 more on UC.

Does it mention in your report that you were awarded LCWRA on the basis of "Substantial risk"? Is it mentioned in a separate specific section in the report?

Asia23

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1037341#Comment_1037341

The report was quite short, if I remember. It references the medical evidence submitted and the details within those reports relied upon by the assessor and then says I meet the substantial risk criteria for LCW and LCWRA (under regulation 35).

I have decided whilst I have no work or work related activity requirements on UC never ever to put a message on my journal under 'work coach'. So far, and only on a couple of occasions, I have had queries which I enter under the 'payment' section so it goes to my Case Manager. I've read horror stories on other forums of work coaches manually actioning WCA referrals, when currently they're not supposed to.

Passerby

https://forum.scope.org.uk/discussion/comment/1037342#Comment_1037342

Work coaches and decision makers are the worst. Most of them do not even have their GCSE but hassle claimants. Honestly, they need to search for real jobs for themselves, in the first place. Decision makers play with the decision of the health professional and change them at their whim!

There have been cases where decision-makers disagreed with the Health Professionals' assessments and put claimants into the Limited Capability for Work (LCW) group while health professionals have recommended Limited capability for work-related activity (LCWRA), even though decision makers have ZERO medical/health expertise! Ridiculous!