Shame on the firms which are taking money away from the disabled
Yet if the prospect of future cuts to essential support isn't concerning enough, private commercial firms too are taking money away from disabled people. And this is happening right now, in plain sight.
In recent months, we have identified instances of private firms offering a "no win, no fee" service to access social security payments. Commercialising a service that people may not always know is freely available.
Most recently, we've seen examples of this for Adult Disability Payment (ADP) – which replaces the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) for working-age adults in Scotland.
Some of the activity is happening through sophisticated, targeted social media marketing. People are being charged up to £400 plus VAT per successful application, with as much as a 10% deduction from their ongoing monthly payments.
Over the course of a multi-year award, this could earn the private firm thousands of pounds – clearly a lucrative if thoroughly unethical approach.
For us, this is a pernicious practice – profiteering from people who need support most. It is the very worst kind of innovation and opportunism, clearly undermining the policy intent of these payments to provide vital financial support to those who need it most.
Expert, impartial, and confidential advice should be free of charge to everyone who needs it in Scotland. And that is what we in the CAB network provide.
If the advice sector was the health service, we would be accident and emergency.
Because while our advice and information is for everyone – somewhat naturally demand is greatest where need and crisis is most acute and urgent.
Like no one else, the Citizens Advice network supports people who are experiencing most harm.
And so people are presenting with ever-more challenging circumstances, usually at a point of crisis where they have nowhere left to turn. Our essential frontline service provides a lifeline to over 190,000 people in Scotland every year.
We are so very often the last door open for people who are out of options and facing unimaginable difficulty – frequently acting as a backstop for failure everywhere else, from social security to energy markets.
We know ours is advice that changes lives because people tell us that.
During the first three months of this year alone, our advisers secured ADP Daily Living entitlements worth £6,659,046, mostly upon initial application.
In simple terms, what does that mean?
Well, it means securing the right outcome, first time-round for people who then get the essential support they need.
As we wrote here last week, day-to-day, essential living already costs more when you have less.
It shouldn't cost you anything to access that kind of expert advice.
David Hilferty is Director of Impact at Citizens Advice Scotland
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
8 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
PIP reform slammed 'creating two-tier system for disabled people'
The new concessions could mean people who are disabled may be treated completely differently depending on when their disability began Sir Keir Starmer revealed on Friday that Labour's principal welfare reform will see some adjustments to safeguard disabled people currently receiving certain benefits and those who satisfy the Severe Conditions Criteria. Although further details are pending, specialists have started to offer their insights on the revisions. Scope, a disability equality charity, has highlighted that, according to the Government's own assessment, 430,000 disabled people will still be adversely affected by the reforms. This figure includes those disabled people who would have met the criteria and applied for disability benefits by the year 2029/2030. James Taylor, Scope's director of strategy, commented: "It is encouraging that the government is starting to listen to disabled people and MPs who have been campaigning for change for months. But these plans will still rip billions from the welfare system. "The proposed concessions will create a two-tier benefits system and an unequal future for disabled people. Life costs more if you are disabled. And these cuts will have a devastating effect on disabled people's health, ability to live independently or work. "We urge the government to properly engage with disabled people and MPs on how best to reform welfare and create an equal future." The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), also chiming in on the recent concessions, illustrated the financial implications by noting a substantial £3 billion cost due to the changes, warning of potential tax hikes come Autumn. The IFS report explained: "Take two people who develop the exact same health problems, but one develops them just early enough (before November 2026) to qualify as an 'existing claimant' and one just too late. "The first is assessed for PIP and UC health element under the current rules and receives £8,930 in total, £3,850 from PIP and £5,080 from UC health element. The second is assessed under the new rules, because of the tighter criteria they do not qualify for PIP, and they receive the new lower UC health element, which after the freeze will be worth £2,370 (in today's prices). "If the government goes ahead with their proposed plans to scrap the work capability assessment, the second claimant would receive no specific support for health conditions at all. These differences would persist indefinitely, in some cases for many years." Initially, the welfare overhaul would have adjusted eligibility for PIP, mandating that both new and current beneficiaries revising their claims must score four points in any single section of the daily living evaluation—a test awarding points based on the aid or tools needed for routine activities including communication and meal preparation. However, the new four-point criteria will only be applicable to those who apply for the daily living element of the benefit after November 2026. The mobility component of PIP will remain unaffected. Originally, it was anticipated that 370,000 current PIP recipients would lose their benefit due to these changes. However, owing to concessions, it is now estimated that only 430,000 future PIP claimants will be affected by 2029/2030. At present rates, losing PIP would have cost claimants £4,150 annually. Additionally, it could indirectly result in thousands of carers losing their carer's allowance benefit, costing approximately 50,000 people £4,340 per year, as reported by the IFS.
Telegraph
11 hours ago
- Telegraph
Prepare for economic collapse: last week the 2026 British financial crisis became inevitable
Make a note of last Friday's date: June 27 2025. It was the day that Britain's coming financial crisis became inescapable. In backing away from his attempt to slow, however feebly, the rise in benefits spending, Sir Keir Starmer was signalling to the world that Labour would never bring Britain's budget back into balance. The storm might break in 2026 or 2027 or even later. Labour politicians will do everything in their power to postpone the reckoning. But debts are not just paper liabilities; they end up being recovered. We have all just watched a hopeless and hapless PM throw away his majority and, with it, any hope of reform. And the bond vigilantes saw what we saw. What were Labour's rebels thinking? Their constituents will be hammered when the money runs out, when salaries and savings lose their value and imports become luxuries. They will be swept from office just as surely as were Greece's socialist MPs after the euro crisis. Do they even believe their own claims? Do they truly imagine that they are shielding the vulnerable? Do they picture themselves posed heroically over some wheelchair-bound child, fending off the ghost of Margaret Thatcher? I doubt it. They have, after all, seen the numbers. They know that one working-age adult in ten is now on benefits. They know that the number is rising, with a thousand people a day applying for Personal Independence Payments (PIP) – a rise which, tellingly, is not mirrored in any indices of sickness. They understand how PIP works. They know it can be accessed on grounds of, for example, anxiety, alcoholism, or ADHD (there are 50,000 claimants in this last category). They are aware that most new claims are for mental health conditions that are hard to verify. They will have seen the online videos explaining how to make a successful claim – you get this many points for saying that you have trouble getting dressed, this many for saying that you can't sit still, and so on. They might even be dimly acquainted with the age breakdown of the claimants. The fastest rise is among 25- to 34-year-olds, an incredible increase of 69 per cent in just five years. Incredible in every sense. Such a sudden and cataclysmic rise in disability would be visible on every street. Do you think Labour MPs, who meet PIP claimants in their surgeries, genuinely suppose that they are all incapacitated to the point of being unable to earn a living? No, this was never about justice for people with disabilities – still less about justice for taxpayers. Indeed, the most immediate consequence of guaranteeing existing but not future claims is to deter people from coming off benefits, knowing that there will be a lower rate if they go back. What we are seeing is the lowest and most cynical short-termism from MPs who want to keep their seats. In parts of urban Britain, Labour's election strategy involves distributing postal votes to welfare claimants along with the warnings that the Tories are coming for their benefits. From a purely partisan point of view, it suits Labour MPs to have constituents who claim state handouts. Sure, handouts are debilitating for the recipients and burdensome for the contributors; but the politicians who arrange the transfer often get an electoral reward. Labour MPs' WhatsApp groups have been pulsing with links to a study by the Disability Poverty Campaign Group which shows that, in nearly 200 Labour constituencies, the number of people claiming PIP is higher than the parliamentary majority. Among the MPs who are, so to speak, dependent on dependents, are Shabana Mahmood, Wes Streeting and Jess Phillips. You have to spend time around politicians to understand the extent to which such surveys strike icy daggers into their hearts. Never mind the moral case for self-reliance; never mind the debts we are loading onto our children. What looms in the feverish fears of MPs is having to mount the stage in their local sports centre and make a concession speech. Yet, paradoxically, they are making their defeat almost certain. The British state spends an unbelievable £52 billion a year on disability and incapacity benefits. According to the DWP, that figure will rise to £70 billion at today's prices by the end of the present Parliament. The changes that were first proposed would not have reversed that rise. They would not even meaningfully have slowed it. They would have shaved only £5 billion from the scheduled increase. In the event, that tiny dent was unacceptable to Labour MPs, fresh from running charities and NGOs, unused to hard decisions, unprepared for unpopularity, uninterested in economic reality. Asked in a BBC interview how she would make up the shortfall, one of the rebel leaders, Meg Hillier, replied airily that that was up to the Chancellor. In truth, the Chancellor's decision has been made for her. Labour backbenchers would rather pull the sky down on our heads than risk a bad local headline. Labour Whips, knowing that the only thing they have going for them is the split between the two Right-wing parties, will do anything to avoid a similar split on the Left. Labour is thus incapable of reducing expenditure. If it could not stick to its commitments on reducing the winter fuel allowance, capping child benefit or slowing the rise in PIP, it is plainly not going to attempt a radical overhaul of benefits. Without spending cuts, two options remain: yet higher taxes or yet more borrowing. Both damage growth – or at least they would if there were any growth to damage. In an economy that is flatlining (at least when we strip out the impact of immigration and consider GDP per head) they will topple us into recession. Which brings us back to the coming gilt strike. Who knows what the trigger will be? It might occur overseas. When bond markets turn, they are not interested in geography, justice or moral hazard. Rather, they look coldly for the weakest wildebeest in the herd, the spavined, limping laggard. And among major economies, that is Britain. Our politicians are shockingly complacent when it comes to the possibility of a full-scale financial crisis. We haven't had a proper one since 1976 and, frankly, even that was tame by global standards. Yes, the markets stepped in to punish Labour's profligacy, short-termism and cowardice. But our national debt back then was 47 per cent of GDP and falling; now it is 96 per cent and rising. Spending a chunk of my teenage years in South America in the 1980s, I am perhaps more alive than some of my countrymen to what a debt crisis looks like. I have seen, not just the inflation, the unemployment, the poverty – but the consequent lurch into authoritarianism. If twentieth-century South America seems too exotic, cast your mind back instead to the euro crisis. Ireland took it best, gulping down its medicine and making serious economies. Public sector salaries were reduced in real terms and there were rounds of redundancies. From cabinet ministers to claimants of child benefit, everyone had to take a cut. I suspect that, under Labour, our crisis will be more Greek than Irish. In other words, we will continue to vote 'against the cuts'. Our politicians will raise taxes in ways that would have made Charles I blush. We will elect parties that promise to 'end austerity'. And, as a result, we will end up having to make deeper cuts. And Labour? Labour will go the way of Greece's PASOK, as voters blame it for having failed to make softer savings while there was still time. It is true that voters themselves are in no mood for such savings yet; but good luck with using that as an excuse. Starmer might manage to limp on until the next election, a prisoner of the 400 standard-issue big-government Labour MPs who want him to stick to the Corbynite policies on which he was elected party leader. Either way, Labour itself is finished. Last week will be remembered as the moment when its MPs took the decision to check out.
South Wales Guardian
11 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Warnings of tax rises after Downing Street welfare U-turn
The Prime Minister said that the concessions strike 'the right balance', but think tanks have warned that the changes announced on Friday morning have made Rachel Reeves' 'already difficult budget balancing act that much harder'. Downing Street declined to rule out the possibility of increases in the autumn, telling reporters on Friday that 'tax decisions are set out at fiscal events'.The concessions on offer include protecting personal independence payments (Pip) for all existing claimants, while all existing recipients of the health element of Universal Credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said on Friday that the changes make tax rises in the budget expected in the autumn more likely. Associate director Tom Waters said: 'These changes more than halve the saving of the package of reforms as a whole, making the Chancellor's already difficult budget balancing act that much harder.' Ruth Curtice, chief executive at the Resolution Foundation, said that 'the concessions aren't cheap, costing as much as £3 billion and more than halving the medium-term savings from the overall set of reforms announced just three months ago'. She added: 'This adds to the already mounting pressure to deliver fresh consolidation in the budget this autumn.' The Resolution Foundation noted that extending a freeze in personal tax threshold by one year would save '£4 billion a year'. Asked about how the climbdown would be funded, Downing Street said on Friday that 'There'll be no permanent increase in borrowing, as is standard. 'We'll set out how this will be funded at the budget, alongside a full economic and fiscal forecast in the autumn, in the usual way.' Asked whether they could say there would be no tax rises, a Number 10 spokesman said: 'As ever, as is a long-standing principle, tax decisions are set out at fiscal events.' Some 126 Labour backbenchers had signed an amendment that would have halted the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill in its tracks when it faces its first Commons hurdle on July 1. The list of Labour MPs putting their name to the amendment had been growing throughout the week, as Downing Street said that they would be pressing on with next week's vote. After the late-night U-turn, Sir Keir said that 'the most important thing is that we can make the reform we need'. 'We talked to colleagues, who've made powerful representations, as a result of which we've got a package which I think will work, we can get it right,' he added. 'For me, getting that package adjusted in that way is the right thing to do, it means it's the right balance, it's common sense that we can now get on with it.' While leading rebels believe the concessions are likely to be enough to win over a majority, some remain opposed to the plans in their current form. Dr Simon Opher, who represents Stroud, said in a statement that he is glad the Government 'are listening', but that the changes 'do not tackle the eligibility issues that are at the heart of many of the problems with Pip'. 'The Bill should be scrapped and we should start again and put the needs of disabled people at the centre of the process,' he said. It is also understood that talks are under way over rebel attempts to lay another amendment next week as they seek to delay the plans, as reported by The Guardian. The fallout also threatens to cause lasting damage, with some backbenchers having called for a reset of relations between Number 10 and the parliamentary party. Speaking to the PA news agency, a number of Labour backbenchers expressed deeper frustration with how Downing Street has handled its backbenchers since last year's election. The Government's original package had restricted eligibility for Pip, the main disability payment in England, as well as cutting the health-related element of universal credit. Existing recipients were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition. Now, the changes to Pip will be implemented in November 2026 and apply to new claimants only, while all existing recipients of the health element of universal credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. The concessions on Pip alone protect some 370,000 people currently receiving the allowance who were set to lose out following reassessment.
