New crackdown on benefits

apples said:

Hi all,

I.ve tried reading this post but become confused very easily, what i did read was that if you are claiming LCWRA the new rules wont affect you, i claim LCWRA and PIP for my mental health, is this new rule not eligible for me or is it just for mobility issues ?

Thanks

No one knows exactly who it relates to at the moment. All we have is limited information. At the moment nothing has changed and everything remains as it is. 

There are definitely some Income Related ESA claimants that have already migrated to UC because some also claim Tax credits and a considerable amount of those people have already migrated across. Those claiming Tax credits as well are not in the excluded group. 

Hi, I am confused by what has been announced. I am on ESA CB in the support group. Not long ago they anncounced that they were brinning in the chance to work and that they would change the WCA but existing claims wouldn’t be re assessed.However, the PM’s announcement seems to suggest they want to do away with the WCA altogether.Does anyone know if the chance to work with no re-assessment for existing claims will happen?

Thanks

apple85 said:

I think you misread my last message

i was referring to the original 2028/29 rollout group (claimants that are esa only or esa+housing benefit only)

some of that 2028/29 have moved over via natural migration (by choice, change of circumstance or other) but not via managed migration

esa legacy claimants with other add ons such as tax credits were never included in the original 2028/2029 group. The official managed migration rollout timeout has them listed for 2024/25 rollout (though the dwp were rushing things out so I don’t know if that means some esa+tax credit (and other mixes) got their managed migration notices in 2023)

I’ve reread the govs own write up several time and believe I understood correctly first time

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9984/#:~:text=The%20rollout%20timetable%20for%20Universal,not%20happen%20until%202028%2F29.

You are correct I didn’t understand it but now you’ve explained I see why i didn’t because what you said didn’t make sense. Of course those that are only claiming ESA and housing benefit haven’t migrated across yet because those are the ones that are not migrating until 2028 under the current rules. 

I know what you were asking but the answer remains the same. 

emc123 said:

poppy123456 said:

I know what you were asking but the answer remains the same. 

I don't know what's happening here lately but Again you're patronising only answering "It hasn't happened", and I've Acknowledge That.  
     My question hasn't been answered.
"Did I hear and read  correctly that (If) proposals go ahead that it Won't affect present Lcwra Recipients"?
 I've asked others so maybe get a helpful response somewhere Else on SCOPE.
      It was a simple respectful question that obviously required more "It might not happen", when I've Said I Know That.

I'm not patronising at all and there's really no need to be so rude! Manners cost nothing.  Let me explain in a different way. Some say it won't affect those that already have LCWRA and some say it will. We don't actually know what exactly will happen, if it does and as I keep advising it may not. 

poppy123456 said:

emc123 said:

poppy123456 said:

I know what you were asking but the answer remains the same. 

I don't know what's happening here lately but Again you're patronising only answering "It hasn't happened", and I've Acknowledge That.  
     My question hasn't been answered.
"Did I hear and read  correctly that (If) proposals go ahead that it Won't affect present Lcwra Recipients"?
 I've asked others so maybe get a helpful response somewhere Else on SCOPE.
      It was a simple respectful question that obviously required more "It might not happen", when I've Said I Know That.

I'm not patronising at all and there's really no need to be so rude! Manners cost nothing.  Let me explain in a different way. Some say it won't affect those that already have LCWRA and some say it will. We don't actually know what exactly will happen, if it does and as I keep advising it may not. 

It's not rude to describe how a person makes one Feel.
I Do follow the rule of being Nice to others in fact my Post is Actually in defence of Others!
I Expressly Said Politely again & again "If", and Should these "Proposals" go ahead.
      And was not asking what "Some Say", I was asking what Sunak Said.
(The fact it Might not Happen doesn't mean it wasn't Said so my Question should be answered not Dismissing like many here).
I feel for them, & the Autistic traits that impose this need for Clarity & Comfort are crippling.

People with Mental Health issues who Need to address their concerns (which Can turn into damaging Intrusive Thoughts) do Not need to be told "It Might not Happen", not only Ignoring their Anxieties but Adding to them, and worse still, Cruelly Dismissing them! 
    We should all Know that the desperate Need to have a better answer than "It might not happen" is within the very nature of their Mental Illness!
   
Everyone is Well aware It Might Not Happen, and they state this as I did, yet they Continue to get That as their Only Answer & It's Just not Right on a forum littered with Vulnerable Scared people.
  SCOPE should Give people the tools to work through the Worst Case Scenario and this is failing them in the worst way.
  

And I know you don't Have all the answers my point is "It might not happen" is Not supportive, as in the Rules.  

Albus_Scope said:

Hey @emc123 thank you for the explanation. We're not trying to shut people down or silence anyone's voice, everyone's opinion is important. But we do want to make sure conversation stays polite, so we like to just do gentle reminders when we see things are starting to get a bit heated. 

I understand the need for clarity as I'm also autistic and hate not knowing, but currently the government haven't laid out any actual proposals and it's only in a talking/green paper stage, so people are right by saying it may not happen, as we just don't know. I'd much rather share information I know is factually correct, rather than something that may just be rumour. But of course, once we have those answers, we will share our findings.  

Thanks so much for your response. 
      I certainly wasn't asking for Rumour or Speculation I was Asking for information that was Factual & Correct as you mentioned.
            The words spoken by Stride or Sunak may not come to Fruition but my Question was Were those words Said...."Did I hear Correctly"?
        And that required a Factual Reply Not an Obvious (and Frustrating) "It Might Not Happen). 
      I'd Said I was Aware of that.
Many thanks for being here and understanding these frustrations.x