Quadruple amputee told to prove he still needs PIP

[sgtkate]

 

Ah yes, I tried posting something similar on a different thread about people who committed suicide or starved to death on benefits, but some on here pointed out that the grieving families were at fault for not realising and intervening.

 

Did they? In fact that doesn't surprise me on here at all. The DWP don't have a great history of late.

[Cyclone]

It's Atos that have really been the problem from what I've read.

 

But that doesn't automatically make it ridiculous when they check someone's claim... It's not that difficult for the case in question to provide the proof is it...

[Alan Ladd]

You have to realise that our Masters in Westminster must be able to ride on the gravy train for as long as possible, after all they cannot afford a sink plug or clean out their moats or put a new roof on their own property, on their miserable low wages. So they claim on expenses, all paid for by us the general public. To enable this gravy train to stay on the tracks, cut backs have to be made, so someone with no legs has to give a contribution, as we all do, the Government say so. So benefits are reduced or stopped, it's only fair you see.

 

Now in the real world our friend with no legs would receive his benefit without any problem or having to resort to begging for them. And our Masters on the train would have to pay their own dues and demands, not steal them as they still do. But THEY have the power, we do not and as such I can't see it changing much in the near future. I despise the whole sorry bunch of them.

 

Angel1.

 

Cutbacks are necessary for one reason only, the Labour party spent all our money. The Tories are slowly getting it back, too slow for me to be honest but progress is progress.

[Mister M]

I would argue that the people who have the broadest shoulders should carry the burden, not the most vulnerable in society in receipt of social security benefits.

 

For example outsourcing of Government functions, like social security, have resulted in the soaring of costs to the taxpayer, and poorer satisfaction of the taxpayer.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/may/27/outsourcing-increase-costs-public-services

 

A large portion of this taxpayer money goes on consultants, chief executives and the like who command high wages for their labour. Yet this never seems to be questioned - it's always the welfare recipient who have to cut back.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Mister M

[Hesther]

Its very easy to be critical, and certainly this case seems insane, however welfare costs have to be contained and were possible lowered. IDS has done an excellent job in challenging the sacred cows of socialist ideology and long may he do so.

 

When welfare costs are brought under control, taxation fairly wrought, genuine claimants such as the man mentioned should be afforded ever more generous treatment. This can only be done by a government that has clear well thought out policies and rigorous enforcement.

 

We are getting ths under the Tories after years of Labour profligacy and inept management.

 

:hihi: Please don't stop them coming.

 

Yes, what a great job IDS has done for the country. He should treat himself to a big breakfast on us. Oh, wait a minute....he already does at £39.00

[Anna B]

Cutbacks are necessary for one reason only, the Labour party spent all our money. The Tories are slowly getting it back, too slow for me to be honest but progress is progress.

 

Will you please get off that. There's always enough money for bombs and wars, always enough money for the House of Lords to snore their day away at £300 a time, enough money for moats and duck houses, and so on....

 

Cutbacks are considered as OK cause it only affects people the Tories have no connection with, living a life they have no understanding of, and who have no power to fight back, and are therefore expendable.

[onewheeldave]

Will you please get off that. There's always enough money for bombs and wars, always enough money for the House of Lords to snore their day away at £300 a time, enough money for moats and duck houses, and so on....

 

Cutbacks are considered as OK cause it only affects people the Tories have no connection with, living a life they have no understanding of, and who have no power to fight back, and are therefore expendable.

 

:thumbsup:

spot on- whatever the state of the economy, there's always plenty of cash for bombs, weapons, 'war on drugs', 'war on terror', oppression of innocents.

 

When will people realise that the scum politicians who come up with these insane policies, can only do so because the people are so deluded as to let them continue to do so.

[willman]

:thumbsup:

spot on- whatever the state of the economy, there's always plenty of cash for bombs, weapons, 'war on drugs', 'war on terror', oppression of innocents.

When will people realise that the scum politicians who come up with these insane policies, can only do so because the people are so deluded as to let them continue to do so.

 

There are also people who support those actions,so should we give up those actions or give up charitable work and give the money elsewhere with no checks and balances.

[Ted Heath]

Will you please get off that. There's always enough money for bombs and wars, always enough money for the House of Lords to snore their day away at £300 a time, enough money for moats and duck houses, and so on....

 

Cutbacks are considered as OK cause it only affects people the Tories have no connection with, living a life they have no understanding of, and who have no power to fight back, and are therefore expendable.

 

The first responsibility of any government is the security of the nation. Unless its a Labour government we seldom get involved in an aggressive war.

 

You attack the House of Lords, I sympathize,would you rather have an elected second chamber? The members would need to be paid. Or would you prefer the House of Commons to be able to pass laws without the scrutiny of another house?

 

The expenses debacle was a disgrace, I note only Labour MPs were actually convicted of fraud.

 

I live and work in South Yorkshire, born and bred here. Kids went to local Comps, I am a Tory, have I no understanding of life? Or is this "undersanding" you speak of confined to the arrogant, envious, destructive left?

[Anna B]

The first responsibility of any government is the security of the nation. Unless its a Labour government we seldom get involved in an aggressive war.

 

You attack the House of Lords, I sympathize,would you rather have an elected second chamber? The members would need to be paid. Or would you prefer the House of Commons to be able to pass laws without the scrutiny of another house?

 

The expenses debacle was a disgrace, I note only Labour MPs were actually convicted of fraud.

 

I live and work in South Yorkshire, born and bred here. Kids went to local Comps, I am a Tory, have I no understanding of life? Or is this "undersanding" you speak of confined to the arrogant, envious, destructive left?

 

Yes, you are a Tory.

 

A typical died-in-the-wool Tory who is so obviously never going to change his views no matter what argument is put before him, therefore it would be pointless trying to discuss anything with you.