Lying to the Benefits people...
Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:30 pm
I know someone who is on Benefit because of depression, he was getting Incapacity and now gets Employment and Support Allowance (ESA). He doesn't have to sign-on though, it is established that he will get it for an indefinate period as he is not able to work. He also gets Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and a third Benefit called something like Extreme Disability Premium, or something like that. He goes to my local pub and I saw him earlier. His depression is quite serious and it cost him his marriage, he has kids and only sees them occasionally now. He was telling me that if you get middle-rate DLA you qualify for the third Benefit, but if you get lower-rate DLA you don't. He was recently reassessed and they said that because he doesn't have someone who cares for him he only deserves low-level DLA, therefore he's not only now going to get less DLA but the third Benefit will go completely. His money has been slashed by over ?100 a week in total.
What interests me is how easy it would have been to just bullshit about it. He is an honest guy and did not, but they phoned him after he submitted a form where he appealed against their decision to move him down from middle-rate DLA to the lower-rate DLA. He said the guy on the phone said he was processing the appeal that day and asked 'do you have a carer?'. He said he didn't and could manage by himself. It seems they would not have asked for evidence if he had said he DID have a carer, just believed him, therefore he would have been retained at middle-rate DLA and would have kept the third Benefit too. I was walking home thinking about all he'd said and it seems to me that if he'd just said he has a relative come round to assist him because his depression is so bad he can't manage on his own, then that would have been enough for the Department - or if he'd said he needs a chaperone to go with him to the shops as he feels so uneasy in crowded supermarkets that he can't go there on his own, then that would have satisfied them. None of this would have been true but it would have swung it with the Department and prevented his money being cut as it now has been.
Some people are too honest for their own good. I would probably have done what he did if I was in his shoes as I'm honest too. This is all something I'm not familiar with as I have a full-time job, but it made me think that there are bound to be lots of people claiming Benefit who DO exaggerate their situation in order to get more money as it seems so easy to be able to. A question to my fellow forumites: would you have pretended you had some assistance from another person, therefore enabling yourself to qualify for the middle-rate DLA, thus getting more DLA and also enabling yourself to get the third Benefit too? Or would you be honest like he was and end up with less cash as a result? It seems so easy to just fib a bit, they will believe you, and you'll be better off. Just saying a relative pops round three times a week to assist you, they apparently don't ask for proof of this just believe you, is enough.
I would be inclined to do what he did, but then if you're going to be about ?100 down each week then it might be tempting to fib a bit. I would like to think I'd be honest though. It's a tricky one.
What interests me is how easy it would have been to just bullshit about it. He is an honest guy and did not, but they phoned him after he submitted a form where he appealed against their decision to move him down from middle-rate DLA to the lower-rate DLA. He said the guy on the phone said he was processing the appeal that day and asked 'do you have a carer?'. He said he didn't and could manage by himself. It seems they would not have asked for evidence if he had said he DID have a carer, just believed him, therefore he would have been retained at middle-rate DLA and would have kept the third Benefit too. I was walking home thinking about all he'd said and it seems to me that if he'd just said he has a relative come round to assist him because his depression is so bad he can't manage on his own, then that would have been enough for the Department - or if he'd said he needs a chaperone to go with him to the shops as he feels so uneasy in crowded supermarkets that he can't go there on his own, then that would have satisfied them. None of this would have been true but it would have swung it with the Department and prevented his money being cut as it now has been.
Some people are too honest for their own good. I would probably have done what he did if I was in his shoes as I'm honest too. This is all something I'm not familiar with as I have a full-time job, but it made me think that there are bound to be lots of people claiming Benefit who DO exaggerate their situation in order to get more money as it seems so easy to be able to. A question to my fellow forumites: would you have pretended you had some assistance from another person, therefore enabling yourself to qualify for the middle-rate DLA, thus getting more DLA and also enabling yourself to get the third Benefit too? Or would you be honest like he was and end up with less cash as a result? It seems so easy to just fib a bit, they will believe you, and you'll be better off. Just saying a relative pops round three times a week to assist you, they apparently don't ask for proof of this just believe you, is enough.
I would be inclined to do what he did, but then if you're going to be about ?100 down each week then it might be tempting to fib a bit. I would like to think I'd be honest though. It's a tricky one.