Solicitors
I've emailed a few asking about pip and primary legislation I've booked a free call for 15 minutes at one twenty I will be asking about primary legislation human rights act anyone want questions to ask I can't sit here day after day need facts
Comments
-
Hello Catherine
I would like to know if my human rights are being violated if I am deemed not disabled enough. Can the government differentiate between what makes someone more disabled than someone else.
Sorry if it’s a stupid question2 -
Hi @Martinp .
Please read
Definition of disability under the Equality Act 2010
(Please read the whole thing. It is quite self-explanatory)0 -
Im not sure if it is self explanatory- it depends if they are altering their definition of "substantial"- my theory is that this is what they are doing. (much like the word "woman" can be given different meanings- it was very interesting to see what that civil servant had to say about that yesterday )
This would fit with the speil about always protecting the "severely disabled".0 -
Hey @Catherine21 how'd you get on with the call? Did they manage to answer some of your questions?
0 -
What do you think they would change substantial to I know the Tories wanted to take substantial risk from wca people should be allowed to be who they want toI have body dismorphia I know how it feels to despise yourself mines my face skin I feel for people who have been effected by this we are going backwards with everything
0 -
No they cancelled said had no lawyer for that messaged 3 others got same reply they don't deal with that even though said give benefit advice suggested to contact CAB will look today for more to see you can get 15 mins free advice
0 -
The Devil is in the Detail: Parliament and Delegated Legislation 2014 Hansard
8. Welfare Reform Act 2012
Running to 177 pages, the Welfare Reform Bill contained 374 delegated powers. It was an enabling bill in keeping with the settled regime of delegation in the highly complex and technical area of social security law. But the volume and scope of the powers was of such a scale that many parliamentarians as well as external stakeholders were united in their concern about the lack of detail, fearing that regulations were being used to mask incomplete policy formulation.
This chapter sets out how Parliament sought to scrutinise a skeleton bill where so much detail about the application of policy in key areas was missing. It explores the extent to which the views of the government and the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee diverged in relation to the allocation of scrutiny procedures, and how the government sought to assert a first-time affirmative approach in the future use of many of the powers. It illustrates the difficulties caused when draft regulations are not available and how highly controversial areas of policy in relation to the Universal Credit, housing benefit, and the Personal Independence Payment thus received little detailed scrutiny in Parliament.
A skeleton bill
The detailed and complex character of welfare legislation results from successive administrations seeking to provide for a whole range of personal circumstances, particularly when concerned with means-tested benefits. Parliamentarians have neither the time nor expertise to scrutinise the vast amount of complex rules and regulations governing social security.
Schedule 9 gave the Secretary of State the power to amend, appeal or revoke other Acts of Parliament that were consequential on the PIP provisions. The government acknowledged that these were broad amending powers but were not unusual in circumstances where it is difficult to identify all the consequential amendments. A new benefit to replace Disability Living Allowance would have wide-ranging consequences and thus broad powers were deemed necessary. However, MPs were concerned at the lack of supporting information with regard to implementation of the PIP, believing this restricted their ability to properly test how the principles would be applied.
0 -
So if stsrmer puts pip through as a money bill or primary legislation is there anyway to challenge it I'm not seeing positive outcomes if that is the case
0 -
I honestly don't know how it all works but there is loads of information here - Hansard Society Delegated Legislation Final.qxd
1 -
Do you know who to email ive done baroness rayner loads labour mps autistic society and few more any you can suggest
0 -
I dont think they will change the word in the act, just the way they interpret it. I think we will be gaslit and told our issues are "minor" and "trivial". I think they will back that up by saying look you didnt even get PIP, how can you be disabled?
0 -
Thanks for your thoughtful insight and for the newsfeed . I completely agree - there really are so many grey areas within the Equality Act 2010. From the structured definitions of what’s considered “substantial” to determining exactly who is protected under the Act, it can feel quite overwhelming at times.
That said, it is reassuring that, at its core, the Equality Act 2010 still provides legal protection from discrimination and harassment for a wide range of individuals -especially when their circumstances meet the Act’s broader (and often complex) definitions. I found this simplified version of the Equality Act 2010 really helpful when I was trying to understand my own rights during some legal challenges I faced in a work environment.
Speaking as a disabled layperson myself, trying to decipher the finer details -such as those outlined in the “Guidance on matters to be taken into account in determining questions relating to the definition of disability” — can honestly make your head spin. Terms like “substantial,” “long-term,” and even “protected characteristics” seem straightforward at first glance, but the way they’re interlinked(as you see in the link ) and interpreted legally can be incredibly nuanced. Unless someone has a legal background or is proficient in statutory interpretation, navigating this on our own can be a real challenge.
I deeply empathise with those who may be struggling to prove their case under the Act. It’s disheartening that people who domeet these broader definitions are sometimes put in a position where they have to “prove” their eligibility for protection. It’s such a sensitive and personal area for many, and I really value the ongoing discussions happening across the legal and advocacy spaces-because it shows just how much more clarity and compassion are needed in how we apply these laws.
Best wishes 😊
0 -
“I think they will back that up by saying look you didnt even get PIP, how can you be disabled?”
I really doubt that would ever be said in a legal scenario . If it has ever happened before,It feels like a completely irrational correlation. The Equality Act 2010 has its own legal criteria for defining disability, which isn’t dependent on benefit entitlement like PIP.
0 -
Unfortunately very little gets published that has gone through the courts so how these terms are being interpreted by judges is not clear to people unless they have been to court. But you may well come out of court feeling gaslit and thinking chances of success against service providers may be on par with rape cases (and Ive not been able to get statistics to dispell that feeling). I read some comments judges had made on one website and some awful things have been said (Ive just spent about ten minutes looking for the site and not being able to find it sorry).
But if "woman" can change from being a word that refers to a gender role and apparently now means biological sex… I do not think they are going to have much trouble blurring the lines on what gets classified as "substantial" if its desired.0 -
Yes The act seems to for doctors hospitals and because dwp don't have any safeguarding which is horrendous I just relized this ? But we will have to appeal appeal I
1 -
Mind you we are used to that people will just gather more evidence I never focused on the questions for points before but I will focus on them more next time when I think hiw bad it is they are changing two I really wish they didn't scrap wca I would rather that than pip as pip is a working benefit this been planned for ages remember they was going to change us over 2028/2029 just reshuffling
1 -
But it does say if you have for longer than 12 months and effects your daily life it is classed as a disability its just like before we have to prove that we are when being assessed
0 -
Slovington "apparently now means biological sex"
Nothing's changed. Start another thread if you must do this.
1 -
I think it could be implied by a defence solicitor in a discrimination case; they could ask questions about disability including about disability benefits. I dont think they are above that.
Arguments will go along the lines of "how could my client know the claimant was disabled", this can happen even when you have told them you are in writing, mentioning the disability by name. And even when you have a deformity that is in no way invisible (and probably should qualify as severe disfigurement- but thats a slippery sod to pin down as well).0 -
Yes I would have preferred them to keep the WCA over PIP. On the WCA form I wrote up my work history on the further info page and explained why each job ended andthe general difficulties in even leaving the house- I think that helped explain my situation far better than PIP does in relation to work.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 14.9K Start here and say hello!
- 7K Coffee lounge
- 81 Games den
- 1.7K People power
- 100 Announcements and information
- 23.2K Talk about life
- 5.5K Everyday life
- 267 Current affairs
- 2.3K Families and carers
- 853 Education and skills
- 1.9K Work
- 498 Money and bills
- 3.5K Housing and independent living
- 993 Transport and travel
- 683 Relationships
- 72 Sex and intimacy
- 1.4K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.4K Talk about your impairment
- 857 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 915 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 37.9K Talk about your benefits
- 5.8K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 19.2K PIP, DLA, ADP and AA
- 7.5K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.4K Benefits and income