Posts tagged ‘disability’

Benefit Payment Cards











Well I have written about Welfare Cards and possible Bitcoin options that have been floated by various ministers, truth is some cards like the Azure card have existed for some time usually given to immigrants seeking asylum, and social care can be paid via a card too to enable carers to be paid. Many who are unable to get themselves a bank account signed up to either by the  governments Simple Payment Scheme and many opted for the Post Office card. Well now the government no longer have investments in Royal Mail which was sold off on the cheap, it latest trick is to make sure the demise of post office accounts and the simple payment scheme will bite the dust to be replaced by another government scheme to track claimants spending.  I-Movo are behind the latest changes and letters are being sent to claimants as we speak.



DWP letter about Simple Payment service

Simple Payment service – replacement service
The Simple Payment service is to be replaced by HM Government Payment Service.
DWP benefit / pension recipients who are unable to open a bank, building society, Post Office or credit union account may currently be receiving payment by the Simple Payment service. This service is coming to an end in March 2018 and customers are being moved to HM Government Payment Service.
DWP is writing to all Simple Payment customers who are actively using their account to tell them that they will be moving to the new service by 20 March 2018. Most customers will continue to receive payment by the same method (SMS text or card). Customers will be issued with a new card where appropriate. Payment will continue to be through PayPoint outlets in the same way as the Simple Payments service.New customers who are unable to open and / or manage a bank or other account will be paid by the HM Government Payment Service from 1 February 2018. They will be given the option to be paid by text, pdf email containing a voucher or card.
There are a few changes from the current service:
 Benefits or pensions issued under the new service will need to be withdrawn within 30 days of receipt or the customer will need to contact DWP to have the payment voucher reissued.
 Overall payments will remain the same but will be paid in sums up to £100. For recipients this will mean that if their benefit or pension is over £100 they will receive multiple vouchers requiring separate transactions to collect the money. For example, for those receiving payment by card, to collect a payment of £165 the payment card will need to be used twice, firstly to collect £100 and then again to collect the remaining £65. For those receiving payment via text or email with pdf vouchers they will receive two codes one for £100 and the other for £65. As long as funds at the PayPoint outlet are sufficient this can be done in the same visit.
 Customers can use any of the 29,000 PayPoint outlets to encash payment subject to funds being available at the outlet.
DWP has also been writing to customers who have Simple Payment accounts which have not been used recently, telling them the account will be closed and requesting that they withdraw any balance. If there are any outstanding balances when the account is closed these will be held centrally and the customer will need to contact DWP to arrange payment to an alternative account

The letter can be downloaded here

HM Government Payment Service uses a system called i-movo. You’ll be able to collect your benefit from a PayPoint outlet in local shops and newsagents. You can search for your nearest store on the PayPoint website.

The DWP will send you vouchers by text message, email or post. You’ll need your voucher, a memorable date and proof of ID in order to collect your cash. The DWP does not need your agreement in order to pay you in this way, so if you cannot or do not wish to be paid into an account, the Government Payment Service will be the only other option. Find out more about HM Government Payment Service on the GOV.UK website.




Letter to David Gawke……. further correspondence ,further excuses












We published the letter  from Independant Researcher Mo Stewart to the then SOS David Gawke on our blog ,  who highlights the excuses the DWP come up with to excuse the ideological bullshit of welfare reform even though many other academic researchers in the UK have torn it to shreds time and again and the harm they are causing to those who have the misfortune of being disabled or chronically ill. Since then this independant researcher has continued to point out their shortcomings and exposed the UK Government repeatedly while they deny rightful entitlement to those who need state support and deny that their policies are causing harm to UK citizens with sometimes fatal consequences. This is the latest series of correspondence published for all to see.




The Letter David Gauke will not be expecting and won’t want to receive

Related image

Image Courtesy of the The Telegraph


Mo Stewart – Independant Researcher WCA……..After her letter to Mansel Alyward one of the architects of the WCA and  her extensive research and publication of her book Cash Not Care , Mo Stewart has sent a explosive letter to the current Secretary Of State David Gauke. I have been granted permission to use it for my blog. One thing that springs to my mind is I would love to be a fly on the wall when he reads this to see his face. For too long now this government as blagged it way to convince the public it is justified to cut benefits to disabled people. This researcher keeps holding them to account.

Redacted Letter to SoS David Gauke by Gail Ward on Scribd


Mo Stewart -Independant Researcher writes to Mansel Aylward -WCA

Image result for Mansel Aylward



Independent Lead Researcher Mo Stewart and Author of Cash not Care has been a thorn in the side of those who came up with the biopychosocial model of disability for many years and has been relentless in her determination to bring to the attention the harm being caused to disabled people by the WCA assessment process which has instilled fear and dread amongst the disabled community. I am publishing her letter to this man  in May 2017 as those in the community and beyond need to read her work and her book, about the demolition of the welfare state. This hasn’t been accidental process but one that has been designed , and even when respective governments have been told this is a flawed process governments continued to use it with deadly effectiveness.

Redacted Letter to Mansel Aylward Public Health Wales by Gail Ward on Scribd

IAPT -The Governments Magic Cure for Mental Health


Most people will have heard of CBT therapy for helping those with mental health problems, some may have received it and felt it helpful,but for the majority with serious mental health problems this will not make a jot of difference and in some cases cause more harm. What is insidious about this is that it will be forced upon those who claim Social Security payments in helping them get back to work with their new  health and work programme which is integral to Universal Credit.

This is most likely going to be part of the so called ”Universal Support’ in Universal Credit where the government has target groups, and I’m sure this isn’t the worst of the many packages this government proposes to force upon those groups mentioned in my other blog ‘Universal Support’.

The government in its wisdom wants to half the disability employment gap which most governments have failed to do consistently for decades. The base rate of 5% has never really changed,so it is folly for them to think so , as employers are reluctant to take on people who have mental health or other disabilities let alone the many with chronic ill health which is never catered for in any policy they dream up.

Work is not a ‘cure for all ills’ as this government would like to peddle to media and swallowed by the gullible public who seem to resent our very existence until they are affected personally because of selfish desires not to pay taxes for those needing support from the state,which I hasten to add have paid their own taxes until they became mentally unwell or disabled, so are eligible to claim payment,after all that’s what NI was all about an insurance to cover you if you fell on hard times .

In an ideal world it should be standard practice for disabled people to obtain work on merit if able, but it all comes back to that real issue of ‘productivity and profit’ so  majority of disabled people don’t tick that box precisely because we are not as productive as our able bodied counterparts by the very nature of disability,being off sick when things are bad, hospital appointments,or regular treatment or surgery.

Its a no- brainer to a rational thinking person, but we know our government don’t think like normal people, they just dream up pointless expensive schemes to waste taxpayers money to show the public they are doing something even though they have demonstrated  most fail and cost more than paying benefits in the first place.

Many more dark oppressive schemes are coming to light so we must be vigilant and stand up against forcing people to be so distressed that they harm or worse death to its citizens. It is not like we don’t know how many have decided to end it all over the constant pressures they are put under daily by the DWP monsters, who are out of control.







Revealed….How Private Insurance Moves to Replace the Welfare State

Image result

Image Courtesy of Legal & General


I have in many of my blogs mentioned the fact that Insurance was to replace the welfare state, many still don’t think it will happen well listen up, it is around the corner and thanks to deregulation via brexit it going to happen, and would have happened sooner if EU law had not protected you. There will many who will live to regret the vote for Brexit.

The government has finally introduced it ugly game plan and they wont stop there as the same insurance company is linked to social care which is undergoing a review also.

Looks like insurance for care through legal and General. Names of independent experts invited by government to provide advice and support engagement in advance of the green paper:

Caroline Abrahams – Charity Director of Age UK
Dame Kate Barker – former Chair of the King’s Fund Commission on the Future of Health and Social Care in England
Sir David Behan – Chief Executive of Care Quality Commission
Dr Eileen Burns – President of the British Geriatrics Society
Professor Paul Burstow – Chair of the Social Care Institute for Excellence
Jules Constantinou – President-elect of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries
Sir Andrew Dilnot – former Chair of the Commission on the Funding of Care and Support
Baroness Martha Lane Fox – Founder and Executive Chair of Doteveryone
Mike Parish – Chief Executive of Care UK
David Pearson – former President of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services and Corporate Director for Social Care, Health and Public Protection at Nottinghamshire County Council
Imelda Redmond – National Director of Healthwatch England
Nigel Wilson – Chief Executive of Legal and General

Quotes Linda Burnip DPAC

Many income related benefits are being moved across to Universal Credit the governments flagship policy which is sinking fast as the holes in this policy are more flawed than the WCA where more complex claimant issues are exposing the holes in a policy which in theory was meant to revolutionise social security and catapult it into 21st century. Well now their focus are those on contributory JSA/ESA which they plan to be part of the Social Insurance Scheme and the only reason they have not done so already is quoted below

Had contributory benefits been abolished whilst UK social
security was bound by EU law, this would have exposed Universal
Credit (the significantly larger budget) to exportability. In light of the
British vote to leave the EU, however, there is now the possibility of
reforming contributory benefits without breaching EU law.

Employers and all those with a stake in this horrendous policy will not just be looking at savings made, but also the huge concern is denial when it comes to delivering on payouts as long as the state doesnt have to foot the bill. Insurance schemes around the globe are littered with claims of those who took out Insurance only to be denied it  upon making a claim leaving many no option but to be destitute or borrow money to take companies to court to get what was rightly their’s in first place. We keep hearing that state support isn’t sustainable, NHS isn’t sustainable yet majority of the country fell for the last National Insurance Scheme which isnt paying out either, due to an empty pot, which is incredulous really given some dont live to collect a state pension, and those who do never get payments reflecting the thousands they paid in over 40yrs of their worklife.

The only winners here are the banks who underwrite such policies. However Legal & General have Capita to manage the shareholders assets Capita’s Shareholder Services Team is available to answer any questions that you have in relation to your Legal & General shareholding.

and non other than….

  • Group Health and Safety Committee – Chaired by Ian D Smith – Head of HR, Shared Services.

It sure as hell is a murky business, this government is up to its neck and following it mantra “we are all in it together”

So whats the crack I hear you all say get to the point, well this is how it meant to work:

The larger the number of premium payers, the lower the risk profile across the total claimant

population and the lower the total cost of enrolment. L&G estimate
a cost of around 0.5% of payroll earnings at approximately £11 a
month. Total pay-out would be £900 a month for a maximum period
of one year, with a 50% replacement rate.6
After one year, a claimant would return to the state benefit system.
A total of £10,800 could be claimed via the social insurance product.
Ultimately this ‘rainy day guarantee’ has been designed so that a
claimant would receive more than they otherwise would have on
state welfare, and so that significant costs are delivered to both the
taxpayer and to employers.

previously eligible for contributory JSA and ESA would fall into one
of three categories: ‘full Universal Credit entitlement’, ‘partial entitlement,’
and, finally, ‘no entitlement’. The projected annual savings
from individuals who fall under ‘no entitlement’ and have no welfare
claim would amount to £60m from JSA and £290m from ESA per annum. Total savings over the 2015–2020 period would come to
approximately £1.66bn

So when many breathed a sigh of relief they were not included in Universal Credit  , they soon will be under a different process.

Read Documents Here:


Health & Work Programme -Universal Credit

Many of my blogs on Universal Credit thus far have been showing how this is a monster of a programme which incorporates the Health & Work Programme. Due to my nocturnal nature I was digging about when I came across these slides and thought this demonstrates how this is intending to operate. Presenting it was more of a challenge but hopefully I have managed to do if my powerpoint works.

The wey weasel are always  ‘Making Work Pay’ or Fullfilling their Potential’ or some other buzzword they embed in the public psyche to hide the abhorrent fuck up and complicated mess this really is in reality for those who are the governments guniea pigs , who have gone from stock to customer and now a ‘benefit unit’!

So fill your boots





The Spectre of the Welfare Card Rises Again for Claimants! Updated

Image result for universal credit logo


Way back In 2013 I raised a letter signed by many leading campaigners and claimants against the proposal of the introduction of a prepaid benefit card proposed by IDS under a Coalition Government . Well just when they  think  you’re not looking  it came to my attention its back on the agenda .

Well  it been used for a long time to administer help to asylum seekers, social care to enable carers to help the person they are caring for and is used now to help in welfare assistance cases. Well I have found research from 2016 where DWP are still talking about it and another link to show it could be planned for Universal Credit which I assume will come into Personal Budgeting Support or as many have seen in my previous blogs Universal Support  with a list of target groups.

So are we going to stand for this hell no.  This will dictate choice and restrict what claimants can spend their money on. Previously we have had letters  with signatures sent via a change petition yet they still pursue this ideological state control of those who are least able to fightback.

After a tip off I found out that, the government behind the scenes and Financial Sector are pushing this idea out yet again. They seriously have not grasped the nettle that removing a claimant’s choice of how they manage their finances is potentially illegal and contravenes their human rights. Way back In 2013 I raised a letter signed by many leading campaigners and claimants against the proposal of the introduction of a prepaid benefit card proposed by IDS under a Coalition Government.

Some Claimants due to their disabilities cannot manage their money and appoint a responsible person to manage them for the disabled person. Some care services have been paid this way for a while, which enables the carer to support the disabled person and allowed the cared for to limit what can be spent in the shops when they are unable to go themselves, without risking giving out passwords to a disabled persons bank accounts. They are also rolled out for asylum seekers.

Well I have found research from 2016 where DWP are still talking about it and another link to show it could be planned for Universal Credit, which I assume, will come into Personal Budgeting Support.

The UK makes an estimated £3 billion of transfers each year, with political rather than practical issues being the cause of the slow uptake to date – the UK government also stands to make sizeable savings by adopting the new method at a time of tight public spending.

Currently 200 public sector programmes across local authorities, National Health Service organisations, housing associations, social enterprises and charities are using prepaid cards to distribute payments such as central welfare disbursements.


“Prepaid products are issued for many different purposes so there may be some exceptions such as when products have been designed to address certain consumer or business needs.  This means that some prepaid products may have specific inbuilt controls limiting where they can be used.”

Kevin McAdam, Director of Prepaid at allpay comments: “We’re seeing much greater acceptance from the Department of Work and Pensions for the benefits prepaid cards bring to schemes such as the distribution of Universal Credit. At the same time, local authorities and housing associations are increasingly switching to prepaid to help fulfil their social care obligations.

“As a result of this growing appetite we’ve recently established a number of similar schemes to that in Edinburgh across the UK and have more lined up to begin soon. It’s conceivable that over the next decade virtually all of the UK’s £3 billion of cash payments could have been replaced by prepaid.”

However, the push for prepaid is not solely to bring costs down and increase security. The wider goal of increasing social inclusion and preventing people from being excluded from the modern digital economy is also leading to calls for the switch from cash.

People who receive government benefits in cash, who may not have access to a full current account or credit card, can often find the cost of living increased. Research shows those who are financially excluded pay a ‘Poverty Premium’ as they are unable to shop online or benefit from Direct Debit discounts. This cannot be allowed where a section of society is treated differently to everyone else, just because they are unfortunate to be needing state support. This is highlighting the ‘Nanny State’ mentality of a government out of control.




Well I have organised another petition which I need 150,00 signatures or more to get this debated in HOC. We shouldn’t be complacent and underestimate the problems of state control this will cause. So please support this! I will add  this later when it gets approved. I will also share on Social Media

Updated here is the petition Link


UPDATED:  This has cropped up time and time again this must not happen as those dependant on state support are being socially engineered to accept whatever the government feels free to do to them without redress.

DWP Actually Do Mean No Reassessments for LCWRA (Support Group)

Image result for universal credit logo


Well I said  seeing is believing well they have surprised me ……..Not ……….no right to appeal


From the 29 September 2017, when considering the re-referral period, the HCP will consider
whether the condition or its functional effects meet the new Severe Conditions criteria. Where the
criteria is met, the HCP will advise no further assessments are needed (unless there is a change
in circumstances).

Q: How can I dispute a decision not to be placed within the severe conditions criteria?

The severe conditions criteria sits alongside the current re-referral periods of 3,1,2,18,24 or 36 months, and comes within the Secretary of State’s discretion as to how often the DWP should review a claim or ask for further information, to which there is no right of appeal.

We can of course look again at any claim where asked by a claimant who feels it has not been processed correctly. However this would not be by the formal Mandatory Reconsideration process and would not carry the right of appeal.

Well as I said in my last blog ‘it seemed too good to be true’ however it’s not all doom and gloom as hopefully you will still meet that criteria  under UC, Unless they pull the reducing someone’s award to WRAG. Nothing would surprise me to see a new directive being misunderstood by HCP or some other skullduggery behind the scenes and  massive spike in reviews downgrading awards. Keep your eyes peeled don’t trust them an inch.


The 2 yr Job Rule for Disabled on Universal Credit is not True!


In the last few days it has been widely reported by various bloggers that those disabled claimants claiming Universal Credit are subjected to finding a job within two years or face a 1 year sanction. This is utter fabrication and feeding many claimants fears which could potentially cause harm. So today I called Welfare Rights ,who called DWP while I remained on the phone, they denied that this information was correct and was downright alarmist and dangerous. That doesnt mean I trust DWP and have submitted a FOI too given 7 years of shenanigans. So you see folks, you can take the fear project and destroy it with Facts!

Those who will be put on Universal Credit (UC) will have to sign the claimant commitment regardless, some will be subjected to full conditionality some will have their conditionality limited depending on the circumstances, and subject to sanctions if they fail to comply with the agreed commitments they agreed with work coach via the Work Plan,My 4 steps,My Values documents.  (Document links provided at bottom of the blog.)

As promised last night, the SKWAWKBOX has been looking further into conflicting reports from DWP insiders concerning the WRAG (work-related activity group) category into which the government, more or less arbitrarily, places some disability benefit claimants and the possibility of sanctions after a fixed period of two years under the Universal Credit (UC) system if claimants have not found work.

Some activists insisted that this was part of the UC system and this was initially confirmed by long-term DWP employees. Others subsequently disputed it. The only thing all were agreed on was that the rules are ill-conceived and extremely confusing.

The SKWAWKBOX contacted a PCS union official who specialises in UC for clarification and received this response:


I’ve been looking at the regulations and I can’t find anything that refers specifically to a fixed time limit in which to find employment.

That is right, because no fixed time limit exists in the regulations


The ‘disabled’ argument, as I’m sure you are aware, is notorious because ultimately the Department through the provide contractors are essentially able to define who is fit or not for work.

For example, a claimant maybe moved from ESA to UC on the back of a WCA [Work Capability Assessment]. The claimant may disagree with the decision but they are stuck.

If they are adamant they are not fit for work, they could refuse employment in an environment they believe will affect their health.


If they have been found to have no Limited Capability for Work, they cannot refuse employment. The fact that claimants think they are unfit for work has been the main issue with the flawed WCA since 2008


This is where the sanction process comes in – a 13wk, 26wk and 156wk sanction could apply (although similar regs existed prior to UC and the 2012 Welfare Reform Act if not as harsh or severe).


In this case you’re looking at failure to apply, not accepting work or leaving on one’s own accord. Their argument is they aren’t fit, the department will still look at sanctions.

The circumstances described here apply to somebody who has not been found to have Limited Capability for Work.


The sanction regime is clearly arbitrary, deeply unfair and dangerous – but there is no rule mandating a fixed time-limit for a claimant to find work.

Again no time limit


However, another PCS/DWP source warned that while the rules don’t include such a limit, the way they are applied may not be as clear cut:

I can tell you that we have received complaints from WRAG claimants about having their ESA revoked after two years. And now they are treated as JSA claimants because they are ‘fit for work but not necessarily their precious occupation(s)’.

ESA cannot be revoked. It simply cannot be claimed after a claimant has been found fit for work. Previous occupations are not a consideration. That has always been the case.


Sanctions have been applied because the claimant has not fulfilled their requirement to find work. The purpose of the WRAG was to enable people to return to work despite being disabled, but this component has now been removed as WRAG claimants are now treated as jobseekers.


WRAG claimants under UC are described as having Limited Capability for Work.. They are not required to search for, be available for and start work, and cannot be sanctioned for not doing so, but they are required to accept work preparation requirements within their commitment and attend WFIs



Other WRAG claimants have been booted off ESA or the sickness element of UC after a period of two years because they failed their WCA – deliberate decision to bully them back to work.


Some claimants will fail their WCA after 2 years. Others after 6 months, 12 months  etc.

2 years is actually a prognosis period, meaning a number of people are reassessed at this stage. Unless there is any evidence of a pattern, this period of 2 years is meaningless


Thanks too to Anita Bellows who has worked with me on this 🙂


So you see folks, you can take the fear project and destroy it with Facts!


Read Frank Zola Blog below;

Update…….. “The Article originally produced by SKWAWKBOX. Claiming to that Disabled Persons could only claim UC for 24 months, is a mishmash of quotes from Gen William Taggart, who was actually talking about an Early ‘Draft’ of the Welfare Reform Acts. At no time did Gen. T directly associate this with Disabled Persons, in fact it was just a heads up for activists/advocates etc, to remember not to get complacent about the Statutory Instrument placed within the Welfare Reform Acts. “


Further confirmation from DWP to my FOI

My FOI response

“Claimants on JSA or UC, who are expected to look for and be available for work, must do all
they reasonably can to find and take up a job. However, the DWP sets no specific time limit for
how long a claimant is given to find a job.
Sanctions are only used in a minority of cases when people fail to attend work-search reviews;
fail to meet the work-related requirements they have agreed in their Claimant Commitment;
fail to apply for work or take up an offer of work; or leave a job, without good reason.
The DWP does not have any statutory powers to sanction or reduce benefit payments solely on the basis
that a claimant has been trying but has been unable to find work within 2 years.”

%d bloggers like this: