And look at the research findings, saying the extra cost of living with a disability is £500 per month. Why, then, has the Conservative Government been trying to cut disabled benefit entitlement?
Elsewhere in the original story, Rob Barfield is right to say DLA (and now PIP) is not a benefit but compensation to cope with the costs of living with a disability.
A DERBY teenager with dwarfism and arthritis who took on the might of the Government after having his benefits slashed and his car taken away has won his fight.
George Coppen, 19, was left stunned when he received a letter saying he was losing 75 per cent of his disability living allowance (DLA) and his specially adapted car.
In desperation he turned to Derby-based disability charity Disability Direct which took on the case and represented him at tribunal – and he won.
Amo Raju, chief executive of Disability Direct, said: “You’ll find a good portion of disabled people living in poverty, way under the breadline, because the costs of being a disabled person are excruciatingly high.
“A lot of people have died, taken their own life, or their quality of life has suffered; it is a disgraceful outcome that disabled people are on the receiving end of Government cuts.
“I was involved in a national piece of work looking at the extra costs of living with a disability and you’re looking at an extra cost of £500 a month, so it’s cutting the benefits to the people who need them most.”
In the interests of balance – and because it shows the Tories up again – let’s have a look at the comment from the Department for Work and Pensions’ flunky:
A DWP spokesman said: “Just because a new decision has been made at appeal stage does not mean the previous decision was incorrect. In the majority of appeal cases, decisions are overturned because claimants have submitted more evidence.”
So they’re saying Mr Coppen may not have provided full information in the first place. Whose fault is that? The DWP’s.
Benefit claimants are asked to answer very specific questions, providing only the information they are required to give.
If the DWP’s decision has been overturned because of extra evidence, then the DWP needs to change its initial means of gathering information – the benefit claim form. That would be the sensible thing to do.
But then, is there anything sensible at all about the Department for Work and Pensions?
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here: