New crackdown on benefits
Comments
-
Hi poppy
im having a reread through my posts to check that I didn’t mistype anything
first off I need to apologise about the comment of neither of us having previously of the uc process - I was pretty sure yourself was esa (though I shouldn’t have presumed that either) and your daughter was also on welfare though I didn’t know what type (nor is it my business) so what I typed was plain incorrect and for that I’m sorry
however I do want to query on a few of your points and expand on a couple of mine:
> when I asked - “ How many currently on esa support group will actually get uc lcwra at their first uc wca?” - I was already aware that the initial migration from esa to uc carries over your current esa to the uc equivalent and maintains award amount.
what I was referring to was the 1st work capacity assessment after you had migrated over (which as many of us have lapsed and had our ‘pencilled in’ recommended reassessment date extended (and yes I know esa support group has no actual end date it does have a recommended award length)). The dwp are still playing catch up with those of us who haven’t been accessed since before the pandemic and will most likely want to get to us asap (I’m guessing to be caught up between 2-3yrs)
also I imagine transitional protection ends once you have your 1st official uc assessment (my knowledge on this is limited - but if your award got downgraded after assessment you’ll be detailing with uc rates)
> I just made the error in presuming I knew your circumstances. I would gently like to say that like I don’t know all your sources of knowledge that you don’t know mine either (which I don’t want to expand on in a public forum) so to write off the accuracy of my own source is a tad short sighted> yourself and mw123 probably didn’t mean to but I felt that you were implying that I was purposely scaremongering and being dishonest/not fact checking enough.
i hope that forum members whom have seen me around know that I am thoughtful (or as much as a HF autistic person can be) and a researcher by natural but politely put am a ‘thorough analyser’!
in no way do I want to imply that the ‘don’t panic over something that may never happen’ isn’t correct, in fact there is huge value in that train of thought
however what I do have a problem with is the implication that it’s the only truth and everything else remotely negative based is automatically an attempt to scare others and I’m wrong for having a differing opinion
(An example is for anyone who’s watched the ‘sex &the city’ and the episode where Carrie told the Russian about Samantha’s cancer - she wanted to insist she was fine but the Russian kept on bringing his friend whom died of - both viewpoints are correct and have value in self preservation for different people - some want to be to move things aside that aren’t a immediate issue and move day to day as long as possible, some what things bluntly laid out in its raw form and spend time straightaway of coming to terms and how to move forward when the time comes.)
im the latter, life has taught me the worst can happen and to spend time preparing for that but after that initial stage (and some headless chicken) to reason with yourself that you’ve done everything you can in your plan to adapt if worst case happen and not let worry consume day to day.
i have no problem those putting things in a box but only opening it when it looks more certain to be possible issue. But I do have a problem with those who keep saying somethings unlikely to happen and won’t entertain or discuss the worst case (and some take comfort in things being broken down and all possibilities being explored for the simple reason of not being surprised and wanting as much control over their fate as possible)
to me not entertaining the possibility of worst case (however likely) and calling those whom do as dishonest and untruthful are unintentionally doing the same thing
(and prehaps im being petty but I am somewhat hurt to be implied to be a troublemaker of sorts and dishonest and my views being disregarded as wrong just like that……..and though it may not seem like it it I always take value in your posts regardless of where I personally stand)0 -
Thank you for seeing the thought process behind my logicMeg24 said:It's easy to keep perspective when you don't have MH problems and when the government is at least making an effort to pretend they are interested in whether we live or die. Unfortunately for many of us, Rishi Sunak just spoke very plainly about exactly what they want to do to us. It's almost impossible not to imagine that we are in the firing line and if we are able, we should plan accordingly. If you'd have asked me 3 yrs ago I would have said I was able to not worry, but now I am terrified. I know that if I don't plan for the worst - and that IS almost exactly what Sunak has said will happen if they win, and Starmer is silent - then I will risk having the sky fall in with no idea how to stop being buried. You can imagine it's all going to be ok if you want, but constructive planning is never wasted imo.
i do think that sunak is increasingly coming across as a ‘mad scientist’ or at least desperate
but at the same way I almost appreciate sunaks ‘honestly’ (how he truly views the disabled) - I wish starmer would clarify his viewpoint as I’ve no clue if he’s appearing to be disinterested in the disabled in order to get the votes and then show his true intent once he has the power to change things or if he’s actually disinterested in the disabled (or he’s appearing disinterested as his true feelings are worse than sunak and that could be a vote loser as sunak is a pretty soulless benchmark imo)
the axing of the scheme to help the disabled into work 3 days after his speech is contradictory and badly thought out & I think some of the public (that don’t drink up the times, telegraph, and Mail’s to be frank fictional tales) are starting to ask what the government intent with the long term sick and disabled actually is
the medical community have also been insulted by all this - sunak is basically gambling on the amount of far right voters in the uk and the number of the public whom accept newspaper opinion as fact and a lack of common sense0 -
Apple85,
A first WCA for UC doesn't mean the decision will be any different to what it was when you were claiming UC. The stats for both speak for their self. Even if you stayed on ESA the decision could move someone out of the Support Group, the chances are the same.
No, your thoughts are not correct about UC TP. If someone was entitled to that, losing the LCWRA element will not remove the TP.
Having read through my comments in this read I never said you were scaremongering at all. What I said was some of what you were saying is wrong and it is. Im sorry if you don't like that but I'm here to advise people and giving the correct advice is very important to me because so many people rely on that. If I see something that's not right I will speak up. It's not just you, I would do the same to anyone and have done many times in the past.
I can't pass comment on sex & the city because it's not something I've ever watched, or wanted to.
I'm a great believer in thinking positive about most things in life and I think I've told you this before. For this reason I don't worry about something until I know I have something to worry about. I've been the same my whole life and it's highly unlikely to change now.
I never implied that you are a trouble maker or dishonest and I'm gob smacked at the thought that you think I did...
1 -
Me and my partner have recently migrated from ESA Support Group to UC(we get more money) and he was placed in the LCWRA group straight away. Having the ESA award letter can be helpful to moving over to UC but it's not really necessary, just might have to wait a week or two for the system to be updated. So I can confirm you should be placed in the LCWRA group.0
-
apple85 said:Hi poppy> yourself and mw123 probably didn’t mean to but I felt that you were implying that I was purposely scaremongering and being dishonest/not fact checking enough.
i hope that forum members whom have seen me around know that I am thoughtful (or as much as a HF autistic person can be) and a researcher by natural but politely put am a ‘thorough analyser’!I wanted to address the recent misunderstanding above regarding my comments. It's clear that you've taken my words out of context and interpreted them as a personal attack, when that was not my intention at all.Ironically, your mischaracterisation of my post perfectly illustrates the very point I was making - that in sensitive discussions like these, it's all too easy for meanings to be misconstrued, even when everyone is arguing in good faith. My original comment was a call for careful, fact-based dialogue to avoid just this sort of misinterpretation.The fact that my appeal for more thoughtful discourse was itself misunderstood only underscores how important that principle is. It shows that we all need to be extra mindful and precise in our language, and charitable in our interpretations of others, if we want to have productive conversations around charged topics.I hope this clarifies that far from engaging in any personal attacks, I was advocating for the kind of respectful, grounded dialogue that we all should strive for. The irony here is noteworthy, and it's a valuable reminder of the very standards of discourse I was championing from the start.1 -
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 ?
Thanks0 -
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.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 ?
Thanks1 -
Thank you @poppy1234560
-
Poppy and mw123:
I’ve got my hand full at home so won’t have time to elaborate much (plus it feels like the more I type the bigger hole I dig so prehaps it’s best for me to toss aside the shovel on this particular topic)
as someone who has a skill of accidentally offending strangers and even friends & family (and my personal opinion that society has become ‘touchier’ over time) and that in current times it feels like the autistic have no right to be offended about most things I wasn’t actually offended by your comment
i know the vast majority of members (99.99%) on this forum have zero malicious intent in their post.
if you actually offended me I’d either bluntly say I was offended or say nothing/just not bother posting a response
I was actually asking for clarification by saying what I thought was being implied but seeking further explanation in a way but was obviously too blunt again (I was really trying to be delicate & mindful of my wording in my last post but obviously failed spectacularly)
and in terms of my popular culture reference - you know I love my metaphors and honestly I thought using something from pop culture to help illustrate my point would hopefully help explain my logic to other readers of this thread - I’m sorry I have some lowbrow tastes…..I honestly picked the first example that came from the top of my head on that one
i think we can all agree that this new rollout date isn’t 100% as of yet (the official gov website still states rollout to esa/esa+hb will start 2028 earliest) and that the most updated uc rollout timetable still has one more group to expand to before us (unless they run groups in tandem which I don’t think they would do) that that last listed group only have all received the migration notice by September 2024 (actual completion of that group won’t be till 3 months later at December 2024 earliest)
I imagine an updated rollout schedule will be published before they start on the old 2028/20 uc migration rollout (which the tweet from that dwp bigwig confirmed that an updated rollout schedule hadn’t been finalised nor did the gov statement mention an immediate start)
i fact the more I think about it the more I wonder (because the gov can be dissolved no later than 16th of December for the next GE) that this may not be another mess the tories intend to deal with (the managed migration rollout has already been slammed as rushed and badly thought out……..and they still have the bulk of most vulnerable cases to go (I don’t think any legacy support group esa claimants have gone through managed migration yet, only those via natural migration and non legacy claimants) - I’m wondering if as well using the threat of toughened conditions as a vote catnip to attract right leaning voters, they are backing labour in a corner and forcing a potential huge scandal in the early days of a possible labour gov doing early damage and increasing the chance the tories will be voted straight back in 5yrs later.
as sunak has nothing left to lose (apart from him losing a no confidence vote) and as vile a small rat he looks after that speech at the ids centre it was still a win win for him0 -
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.I’ve actually advised quite a few of those people.0
-
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.
1 -
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
0 -
Hi @Tonawanda17 I understand the confusion, but again, nothing has happened, it is all just talk still and these things may never end up happening.0
-
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.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.For those claiming Tax credits as well as ESA some have already migrated across.0 -
Hi, although it's a relief for LCWRA recipients to hear the changes will not affect them(if implemented), there is still the fear come Reassessment that they Will,(Failing a WCA on Reassessment)?MW123 said:
Poppy has highlighted a reassuring point: if you are already receiving LCWRA benefits, the upcoming changes will not affect your situation. As I understand it, the proposed changes (note that these changes are proposed by the current Tory government and would only be implemented if they are returned to power after the next general election; nothing is confirmed or set in stone yet) are primarily aimed at claimants who need to provide regular sick notes to the DWP.poppy123456 said:
No they do not, if they've been found to have LCWRA.WhatThe said:
apple85 IS correct - claimants with health conditions do become 'disabled job-seekers' under UC.
...Then again I read that those On LCWRA now won't be Reassessment, did I read that correctly)? *again I know it's (if) :-) x
0 -
Hi, if this is the case then why was it reiterated 'New Claimants only,WhatThe said:
The only exception will be for LCWRA Special Rules cases I'm sorry to say. The rest become 'disabled job-seekers' under UC regardless of the health component.
& those already in receipt of LCWRA won't be affected by the Proposals?0 -
No one knows what may or may not happen yet because they are only proposals. People can think or guess what they want but that's all it will be right now.emc123 said:
Hi, although it's a relief for LCWRA recipients to hear the changes will not affect them(if implemented), there is still the fear come Reassessment that they Will,(Failing a WCA on Reassessment)?MW123 said:
Poppy has highlighted a reassuring point: if you are already receiving LCWRA benefits, the upcoming changes will not affect your situation. As I understand it, the proposed changes (note that these changes are proposed by the current Tory government and would only be implemented if they are returned to power after the next general election; nothing is confirmed or set in stone yet) are primarily aimed at claimants who need to provide regular sick notes to the DWP.poppy123456 said:
No they do not, if they've been found to have LCWRA.WhatThe said:
apple85 IS correct - claimants with health conditions do become 'disabled job-seekers' under UC.
...Then again I read that those On LCWRA now won't be Reassessment, did I read that correctly)? *again I know it's (if) :-) x
0 -
I've already acknowledged the (if), I was Asking if I'd read and heard Correctly, that those Already in receipt of LCWRA aren't to be affected the "Proposals".poppy123456 said:
No one knows what may or may not happen yet because they are only proposals. People can think or guess what they want but that's all it will be right now.emc123 said:
Hi, although it's a relief for LCWRA recipients to hear the changes will not affect them(if implemented), there is still the fear come Reassessment that they Will,(Failing a WCA on Reassessment)?MW123 said:
Poppy has highlighted a reassuring point: if you are already receiving LCWRA benefits, the upcoming changes will not affect your situation. As I understand it, the proposed changes (note that these changes are proposed by the current Tory government and would only be implemented if they are returned to power after the next general election; nothing is confirmed or set in stone yet) are primarily aimed at claimants who need to provide regular sick notes to the DWP.poppy123456 said:
No they do not, if they've been found to have LCWRA.WhatThe said:
apple85 IS correct - claimants with health conditions do become 'disabled job-seekers' under UC.
...Then again I read that those On LCWRA now won't be Reassessment, did I read that correctly)? *again I know it's (if) :-) x
0 -
I know what you were asking but the answer remains the same.0
-
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.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 15K Start here and say hello!
- 7.1K Coffee lounge
- 83 Games den
- 1.7K People power
- 107 Announcements and information
- 23.6K Talk about life
- 5.5K Everyday life
- 315 Current affairs
- 2.3K Families and carers
- 859 Education and skills
- 1.9K Work
- 504 Money and bills
- 3.5K Housing and independent living
- 1K Transport and travel
- 869 Relationships
- 254 Sex and intimacy
- 1.5K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.4K Talk about your impairment
- 859 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 916 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 38.5K Talk about your benefits
- 5.9K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 19.3K PIP, DLA, ADP and AA
- 7.8K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.5K Benefits and income