Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Personal independence payment & other disability related benefits  →  Thread

PIP regulations to be amended

‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 > 

 

WillH
forum member

freelance welfare rights trainer

Send message

Total Posts: 105

Joined: 17 June 2010

Yes exactly. So I think the BBC’s reality check is flawed. There’s nothing to stop existing claimants from losing points because of these regs following a reassessment.

There are no savings provisions. Or am I missing something?

     
Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 1232

Joined: 14 March 2014

DWP getting desperate trying to get their message across that they’re not cuts…‘get the facts’!!!

https://twitter.com/dwppressoffice/status/836941509865910273

     
Benny Fitzpatrick
forum member

Welfare Rights Officer, Southway Housing Trust, Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 282

Joined: 2 June 2015

Is that the real facts or the alternative facts?

     
Mark of Carnage
forum member

Welfare Rights Officer, Salford City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 41

Joined: 17 June 2010

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK - 01 March 2017 12:20 PM
sue c - 01 March 2017 11:57 AM

I have read that the changes come into force only for NEW CLAIMS made from 16 March but can find no reference. Is this correct and why?

Sue

New regs say “Coming into force 16th March 2017” but as far as I can see, it will affect new and repeat claims from that point if implemented. Current claimants won’t be affected until reassessment so maybe that’s where confusion comes from?

Does ‘come into force on 16th March 2017’ mean it affects all PIP decisions made on or after 16/3/17?

e.g. would it affect a PIP claim where a claim is initiated with the PIP1 done prior to 16/3/17 but the decision is made on or after 16/3/17?

      [ Edited: 1 Mar 2017 at 02:49 pm by Mark of Carnage ]
shawn
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 1890

Joined: 14 April 2010

independent.co.uk reporting that:

SSAC will now consider the new PIP regulations at a meeting next Wednesday.

It raises the prospect of the committee criticising the decision before MPs vote on it, with a threatened Tory revolt – which must happen before 16 March.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-disabilty-benefits-social-security-experts-ssac-pips-personal-independence-payments-pmqs-a7606296.html

     
Damian
forum member

Welfare Rights Officer, Salford Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 234

Joined: 16 June 2010

The BBC may have to step up their campaigning to get this through.

     
shawn
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 1890

Joined: 14 April 2010

shawn - 02 March 2017 10:19 AM

independent.co.uk reporting that ... SSAC will now consider the new PIP regulations at a meeting next Wednesday.

Now a statement from SSAC: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-personal-independence-payment-amendment-regulations-2017-statement-by-paul-gray

     
Jane OP
forum member

The National Autistic Society, Welfare Rights, Nottingham

Send message

Total Posts: 194

Joined: 13 January 2011

Re when this take effect – I think it is for all decisions made on or after 16th March – as discussed above.

But according to clients the PIP office is telling people over the phone that it only applies to claims made on or after the 16th. I can’t see how that would be the case – there would need to be transitional protection in the regs to allow that?

Any thoughts?

     
Dan Manville
forum member

Mental health, Wolverhampton CC Welfare Rights

Send message

Total Posts: 1579

Joined: 15 October 2012

Jane OP - 03 March 2017 09:22 AM

Re when this take effect – I think it is for all decisions made on or after 16th March – as discussed above.

But according to clients the PIP office is telling people over the phone that it only applies to claims made on or after the 16th. I can’t see how that would be the case – there would need to be transitional protection in the regs to allow that?

Any thoughts?

The PIP helpline often make up things as they go along. There is no transitional protection.

     
stuart
Administrator

rightsnet editor

Send message

Total Posts: 188

Joined: 21 March 2016

New House of Commons library briefing published today on changes to PIP eligibility criteria, ahead of this afternoon’s PIP: urgent evidence session before the Work and Pensions Comittee.

     
Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 1232

Joined: 14 March 2014

Policy costings in budget show savings being made by amendments to regs - government still pushing the spin that it’s ‘reinstating the original intention’  - could have sworn that’s what judges were doing when they referred to the consultation responses in their judgments…

Relevant page attached - full document at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/597335/PU2055_Spring_Budget_2017_web_2.pdf

     

File Attachments

stuart
Administrator

rightsnet editor

Send message

Total Posts: 188

Joined: 21 March 2016

Ahead of Thursday’s planned commencement of new PIP regulations, DWP have published guidance on amendments to daily living activity 3 and mobility activity 1- ADM memo 3/2017

     
Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 1232

Joined: 14 March 2014

The SSAC has written to Penny Mordaunt re PIP amendments -

{quote]... the Department must be clearer in its articulation of policy intent in the future….

We therefore recommend that the Department should explore further the impact of these regulations on existing awards, where there is a risk that previous decisions may not be consistent with the original policy intent….

We therefore recommend that the Department should both (a) consult more widely with representative bodies and health care professionals; and (b) improve the estimate of likely impact before the changes are introduced. {/quote]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-personal-independence-payment-amendment-regulations-2017-ssac-correspondence

     
stuart
Administrator

rightsnet editor

Send message

Total Posts: 188

Joined: 21 March 2016

Penny Mordaunt’s response to questioning about the SSAC letter yesterday in the House of Commons -

‘The Social Security Advisory Committee decided not to take the regulations on formal reference or to consult further. It made two recommendations, which we are considering and will respond to in due course. As the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has said from the Dispatch Box, there is no change to our policy, our budget or the award amounts. We can be confident that no one’s award will be altered, all things being equal, if and when they are reassessed, because prior to the relevant case, the case law was conflated and confused, and therefore no assessment providers changed their scoring and no DWP decision makers altered or increased the award amounts. It is very important that we reassure people on that benefit that there is no change to the policy, to the budget or to the award amounts, and that if their condition is the same, they will continue to receive the award.’

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-03-14/debates/D12598BF-C93D-4687-90AB-E93854A608F8/BudgetResolutions#contribution-D592A16C-F721-4858-A74D-AB86164B142B

     
Peter Turville
forum member

Welfare Rights Worker, Oxford Community Work Agency

Send message

Total Posts: 928

Joined: 18 June 2010

Daphne - 14 March 2017 03:00 PM

{quote]... the Department must be clearer in its articulation of policy intent in the future….

 

What the SSAC didn’t then say was ... and how that policy intent is then prescribed in regulations (that also make clear / retain the policy intent).

To my mind part of the problem - illustrated by these Activities - is trying to cover several differing policy intents / underlying causes of individual need in a single Activity. Then try to define in regs legal boxes into which to fit individuals (points scores) that encompass the whole range of physical / mental and other conditions / disabilities.

DL Activity 3 - manage medication / monitor a health condition / therapy. The descriptors / points scores do not provide for a heirarchy of need as claimed by the DWP.

MC Activity 1 - undertake a journey + overwhelming psychological distress / plan a route / follow a route (due to cognative / visual impairment etc. needs). Again the descriptors / points scores do not provide for a heirarchy of need as claimed by the DWP but rather two destinct heirachys (with some bluring at the edges as pointed out by the SSAC) which might have been better dealt with by two seperate activities?

Arguably, compared to DLA with more general concepts like ‘attention’ and ‘supervision’, PIP requires much more detailed or specific evidence / fact finding etc to then identify the appropriate descriptor (legal box) into which the claimnt fits for each Activity.

And then the government is surprised when the judiciary has to interpret the policy intentions and complex legislation in practice!

Any bets on which will be the next Activities to be amended? and how many such amendments will take place before a future government argues PIP is no longer fit for purpose and needs to be replaced by a modern and more responsive disability benefit?

      [ Edited: 15 Mar 2017 at 10:28 am by Peter Turville ]