Real PIP losers revealed, just before Lords vote

By staff writers
January 17, 2012

Talk about last minute. It was only yesterday (16 January 2012), on the day before the House of Lords debates the issue, that the DWP finally published the proposed points thresholds for getting an award of Personal Independence Payment (PIP) in a document entitled ‘Personal Independence Payment: assessment thresholds and consultation’.

The document reveals who some of the biggest losers under the PIP replacement for Disability Living Allowance (DLA) will be, unless there is a legislative pause for reflection, data re-examination and policy reform, as called for by leading charities and Ekklesia.

Benefits and Work have done the homework on this, and their full briefing should be read here:

In summary, claimants who cannot walk more than 50 metres but who do not use a wheelchair will no longer be entitled to the enhanced (higher) rate of the mobility component, on those grounds alone. Instead they will get only the standard rate. Many blind claimants also look set to lose their higher rate mobility award, only recently won after years of campaigning.

Claimants who cannot prepare and cook a simple meal will not be entitled to any award of PIP on those grounds alone, whereas they are currently entitled to the lower rate of the care component of DLA.

The timing of the DWP release gives peers virtually no opportunity to work out who is and isn’t likely to be awarded PIP and, more importantly, makes it impossible for disability groups to study the points system and write briefs for peers prior to the debate, reports Benefits & Work.

At this stage, both the points and the thresholds are draft ones and may be changed in the light of further consultation. However, the government has said that it expects half a million fewer people to be receiving PIP in 2016 than would receive DLA, if these proposals are accepted.

The document provides 15 case studies showing how the assessment system might work for people with various different conditions, depending on their severity.

* Full article:

Although the views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of Ekklesia, the article may reflect Ekklesia's values. If you use Ekklesia's news briefings please consider making a donation to sponsor Ekklesia's work here.