The Universal Credit Bill is now certain to become law, after being subject to some very significant amendments which removed all matters relating to personal independence payment (PIP).

However, this is just the start of years of proposed welfare reforms by the Labour government.

We’ve set out some of the major planned changes below.  Over the summer we will be creating a more detailed summary.

Autumn 2025:  Timms PIP assessment review begins work

At this point there is no certainty over whether Timms review of the PIP assessment relates to current claimants or only to new claimants, once the new assessment comes into force.

According to the terms of reference, the review will include will include consideration of:

  • The role of the PIP assessment.
  • The assessment criteria – including activities, descriptors and associated points. The review will consider both the Daily Living and Mobility elements of the PIP assessment.
  • Whether any other evidence should be considered alongside the functional assessment to fairly reflect the impact of living with a long-term health condition or disability, including related to an individual’s personal circumstances and environment.
  • How the PIP assessment could provide fair access to the right support at the right level across the benefits system.
  • What role the assessment could and should play in unlocking wider support

Timms says that he will “engage widely over the summer to design the process for the work of the review, including to ensure that expertise from a range of different perspectives is drawn upon.”

The actual work of the review will begin in the Autumn of 2025. At this stage we have no idea whether the review will share information about its work as it goes along or whether it will be kept confidential until its findings are handed over to the secretary of state in Autumn 2026.

Date TBC:  Pathways To Work  White Paper to be published. 

We don’t have a date for the white paper  yet.  It could be as early as Autumn 2025.  The white paper follows the Green Paper Pathways To Work consultation and should include proposals on:

  • Removing barriers to trying work
  • Supporting people who lose entitlement to PIP
  • Proposed Unemployment Insurance contributory benefit
  • Delaying access to the UC health element until age 22
  • Raising the age at which people can claim PIP to 18

Timms has said in his terms of reference for the review of the PIP assessment that the abolition of the WCA will also be in the white paper.

April 2026:  Universal Credit Act comes into force

The Universal Credit Act will introduce the cuts to the UC health element for new claims, the increases to the UC standard rate and the introduction of the severe conditions criteria as a means of deciding who gets the higher rate of the UC health element.

Autumn 2026: Timms review of the PIP assessment given to the secretary of state

The government has said they want to introduce changes as quickly as possible after the Timms review is completed.  How soon they happen will depend on whether they require primary or secondary legislation or no legislation at all.  But some changes could come in as early as Spring 2027.

2027/28:  Delaying access to the UC health element until age 22

This is one of the issues that was consulted on in the Pathways To Work Green Paper.  We should have more details, including whether Labour intend to go ahead with the proposal, when the White Paper is published.

2028/29:  Abolition of the WCA

The work capability assessment (WCA) is the current test which gives access to the limited capability for work-related activity (LCWRA) element of universal credit.

The LCWRA element of UC will be replaced for new claimants from April 2026 by the UC health element.

Then, from 2028/29, the WCA will be axed and eligibility for the UC health element will depend upon being in receipt of the daily living component of PIP.

There is currently no certainty about whether current LCWRA claimants who do not receive PIP daily living will be affected by the change.

2028/29: PIP/UC single assessment

At the same time as the WCA is abolished, the new PIP assessment that is created by the Timms review will be introduced if it has not been introduced earlier. This single assessment will give access to both PIP and the health element of UC.

2028/29: New Unemployment Insurance contributory benefit

The Green Paper gave sketchy details of a proposal to replace New Style Employment and Support Allowance (NS ESA) and New Style Jobseeker’s Allowance (NS JSA) with one new Unemployment Insurance benefit. 

We should know more when the White Paper is published.

There is no certainty about how this proposal might affect current claimants.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    I'm really confused with what's happening to UC LCWRA. Is everyone who doesn't currently fit the severe criteria going to be seen as fit to work? That will kill me sooner than taking away my PIP. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @John Just to avoid confusion for anyone, I think you meant April 2026.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @CMB No.

      The severe conditions criteria group currently is just LCWRA and exempt from work capability reassessments.

      April 2016 for new UC LCWRA claimants being in the severe conditions criteria group will also result in getting the same higher UC LCWRA element as all existing UC LCWRA recipients get. All other new UC LCWRA claimants get less money.

      2028/2029 The work capability assessment is abolished, LCW and LCWRA status cease to exist. And instead receiving PIP daily living component gives people the UC health element (this will be at the same rate as LCWRA). The new Timms PIP assessment system will have eligibility criteria for a severe conditions criteria group.

      As far as conditionality goes after the work capability assessment is abolished in 2028/2029. UC health in the severe conditions criteria group probably unconditional as deemed severely disabled for life never expected to be able to work. UC health required (with some exceptions) to engage in occasional support conversations (no idea how often, it could be a little as each time PIP is awarded/re-awarded, or every x number of years). If too few UC health recipients move into work the government plans to reconsider the level of conditionality. UC no health element full conditionality and sanctions regime at the discretion of a work coach.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    Of course it will get Royal consent, when has the Monarchy ever cared for the disabled or mentally ill unless it's for a photo opportunity for their propaganda wagon. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @A very depressed and desponde I don't agree with that.  They have spoken out about a number of issues but cannot interfere in the political process.  The Monarchy has not done that for many, many years!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    Can someone please for each category in this article, itemise which change will affect only new, vs old claimants?
    I'm struggling to understand.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    Kendall is being grilled by the DWP committee tomorrow morning if anyone is feeling masochistic enough to what her talk about the disabled while pulling faces like she wants to punch someone 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    @Helen, I sent a reply - on the original post!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @HL I can't even find my original question. Which shows the state my brain is in !
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    I know the House of Lords can just be ignored now it’s a money bill, and I know withholding royal assent is extremely rare. However, all opposition to this bill helps to raise awareness and create momentum for whatever we try to achieve with the Timms review.
    @Tallbob2 – I agree.

    As requested -
    Speakers’ List
    Why is the Speakers’ List at second reading so important?
    Contact a member of the Lords

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    So ESA Support Group and UC LCWRA WRAG, without PIP daily living claim in the future have suddenly been cured by 2029. Well miracles and unicorns are real apparently.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @John Well said John you are 100% right, some disabled people will be forced to do what they cannot do.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @Cat Nobody yet knows how this is going to work.  It is a proposal at this stage, not a law.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Cat And JobCentre Work Coaches suddenly made competent at determining what ill and disabled people are capable off, what engagement with the DWP they should have, what activities they should be required to undertake and if they should be recommended for benefit sanctions for non compliance. And the DWP safeguarding system suddenly made fit for purpose and actually followed by staff.

      The Pathways to Work green paper policies are not just going to cause people to lose a large chunk of their benefits. It is going to cause the DWP to engage in harmful contact and interactions with people. People who are unable to engage with the DWP at all or unable to do what the DWP expect them to be able to do. People will end up hospitalized and people will end up dead, not just poorer.  
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    With the stroke of a keyboard, millions of disabled and sick suddenly became future government cannon fodder to be cured because of legislation and a signature on a green paper. Remember, your disease and disability is just a figment of your own imagination. rise and go on your way; it's for the government's greater good to reduce numbers at any cost.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    I have asked this question before, but no one seems to know the answer, so sorry to be repetitive, but what happens to those that are still on DLA with an indefinite award? Does this mean that we won't be able to transfer over to PIP in time & will lose the health part on our universal credit? Its all very worrying & i was hoping someone may now have some answers please.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 4 days ago
      @John Thanks for all that John. Stat-Xplore didn't come up in any of my searches, it's a good choice to add to my bookmarks menu, cheers! 

      For some of us, it's good to know that pensioners stay on DLA. But working age DLA claimants seem to be very unrepresented and those MP's who've said they'll be treated as new PIP claimants -if true- will be badly let down. They'll lose out with lesser awards, won't they? I hope it's not so, but we will all fight on for each of us. I can't bear the thought of anyone being left behind.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @Nutcracker Nutcracker, A disabled family member has decided to apply for PIP now because of this uncertainly. We don't know what's going to happen with the Timms review, but if for instance PIP were made more difficult to claim, protections could theoretically be offered to current claimants. Anyone who claims successfully now would be a current claimant by then.

      The other thing about applying before you're invited is that it puts you in control of the timeline. I wrote out the answers to the PIP questions at my own pace using the Benefits & Work handbook, and only requested an application form when I'd done that and gathered up the evidence I'd need. It meant I wasn't struggling to get it finished to the short deadline DWP gives you.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @Nutcracker Hi Nutcracker, I also share your worry. I'm frightened that we will be treated as new claimants as that is what has gone on before. I am sure that B&W will post us with updates but I do worry that the gov't aren't talking about us. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @naheegan Naheegan, thanks for making me feel that im not silly asking the same question. I feel sometimes that I'm going mad with all the worry. I keep asking as I'm not sure whether to apply for PIP yet & not lose the health side of things, by doing this early. But the thought of having to jump through hoops to get PIP, is filling me with dread also. Im just basically stuck at the moment & don't know which way to turn..... The whole thing is a complete shambles! This government should be ashamed of causing all this unnecessary, hurt, confusion & anxiety. Thank goodness ive never voted them & after all this they never will get  my vote!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @naheegan
      Stat-Xplore does a breakdown of DLA recipients by age.
      The figures are a bit out of date.
      It is about 130,000 working age DLA recipients minus however many are in Scotland as welfare is now a devolved issue, plus however many are in Northern Ireland.

      Pensioners on DLA stay on DLA.
      Children claim DLA not PIP.

      So far no MP appears to have asked how many working age people are currently on DLA and what is going to happen to them if they migrate after the PIP assessment system changes. Some MPs have told concerned constituents that they will be treated as new PIP claimants. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    In today’s Guardian an opinion piece “Disabled people want to live a full life. Instead, we’re forced to scrap over our right to food and a wash”
    Frances 


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/676ebae9498a4ff961a85d0a/The_7_Lenses_of_Transformation.pdf

    Published 14.07.2025 it includes case study on Universal Credit, might be worth a read to understand DWP’s plan & strategy!!!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @rookie Dyslexic me, item 28 page 31, I picked up the wrong page number.
       In essence they say instead of announcing a complete roll out by x date, they now pause to reflect on a “test and pause” or to put it another way we will learn if we are capturing enough claimants who no longer qualify and amend accordingly so more don’t qualify! 
      Sorry for the Cynicism but there’s so much slight of hand tactics, I’ve become very distrustful even when it sounds like it’s going be good news, I’m looking for the catch.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Jdh You think??
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Jdh You will find it in case study 3 from page 28
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    Sir Timms Promised parliament that he would not make PIP eligibility harder with the 4 point rule but he could rescore the descriptors with the same effect, we must watch him with EAGLES EYES   
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    2029, general election...and labours out.  Hopefully sooner.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @Neil Cook Word for word here is Reforms stance on PIP 

      Face to Face, Not Remote Assessments
      for Benefits
      Personal Independence Payment and Work
      Capability Assessment should be face to face.
      We will require independent medical assessments
      to prove eligibility for payments. Those registered
      with severe disabilities or serious long-term illnesses
      would be exempt from regular checks. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @george25 I have been searching for Reform-uk's stance on PiP & all I can find is if they were in government then they would make all PiP assessments face to face with a properly qualified  medical expert in appropriate fields. They state that too many people scam the system with phone assessments. Conservatives want to give everybody vouchers instead of money LOL. I like the Liberal stance atm!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @MrFibro Agree with Neil below , we all want labour out as they are NOT labour anyway but the Conservatives and Reform are literally worse for disabled people ! Both have said labour didn't go far enough in cuts to welfare ! So we need to vote for someone else PLEASE !
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @MrFibro Who do you propose instead? 
      If the snake oil salesman gets in, There won’t be much point in this website!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @MrFibro Be careful what you wish for, the Tories and Reform are much worse than this useless shower
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    This article creates unnecessary confusion by stating there is 'no certainty' for existing claimants. During the debates around July 1st, Works and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall gave a direct and specific promise as a key concession: 'any existing Pip claimant will be reassessed under the currrent rules wheneveer their claim is reviewed.' This was a clear commitment to a two-tier system to protect current claimants. To ignore that commitment misrepresents the government's stated position and will cause needless anxiety.

    Frankly, I am sick of Benefits and Work presenting their speculative OPINION as fact, especially when it flies in the face of direct promises made in Parliament. It's irresponsible to frighten vulnerable claimants based on an interpretation when the official word is one of reassurance.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Pious Sorry if this is off topic - my award is due to end in November 2025. I sent my forms back on June 1st.

      I have yet to hear anything other than 'forms recieved' 

      Question. My condition has not improved, I have gotten worse. However, I am concerned that I will get a letter to tell me that the award is to be stopped, with no warning. If this was to happen, it would mean my award is closed a few months early. Can this happen? 

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @Gail Ward The it was clarified in a public statement that she misspoke ( as mentioned elsewhere in this thread).

      Now,  I'm not saying that looks great I mean I getting your own policy wrong - that's terrible !  I could possibly excuse the fact everything was in a state of flux and she looked like she hadn't slept for a week, but... NOT good enough !! 

      The point we're trying to make though, is -

      Putting out a headline every time something like this gets mentioned that either hasn't had time to be verified or only reflects a supposition about what something MIGHT mean;  or can only be really read in the context of the whole article. Well, it's Clickbait journalism. I
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @John @John I read all the full examples you give as Kendall saying that existing claimants will not be protected from the Timms review, only from the 4-point rule.  

      Maybe we can agree that Kendall's statements are, at best, open to different interpretations.  Taking them as an unequivocal promise that new claimants will not be affected is giving them a clarity they do not possess.  

      If Kendall wanted to give a firm assurance, she could very easily have said:  "Existing claimants will not be affected by the four point rule or by the Timms review". She had multiple opportunities to say that, yet she never did.

      When politicians are as imprecise as Kendall was, it's generally because they want to keep their options open.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Gail Ward The government has stated in that reply Kendall misspoke. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Elly I think it is perfectly reasonable to have watched or read the debate on the 30th June and gone away with the impression existing claimants are protected not just from the 4 point rule but also the Timms review changes to descriptors and points.

      The Timms review is repeatedly mentioned by Kendall and raised by other MPs. And every time Kendall mentions existing claimants she goes on about them being protected. And never categorically says they will be protected only from the 4 point rule, but will be reassessed in future using the Timms review changed descriptors and points.

      Her statements and answers create intentionally or otherwise the opposite impression that existing claimants will be protected.

      "will not affect existing PIP claimants"
      "will not relate to existing claimants"
      "protecting existing claimants and beginning to make changes for future claimants"
      "there will be two sets: the people who are on the existing system, who will be protected; and"
      "we are protecting existing claimants"
      "I want to be crystal clear: people who are currently on PIP and are on PIP by the time these changes come in—November 2026 —will remain on that benefit under those old rules."
      "Existing claimants will remain on the current rules, even if and when they are reassessed."
      "we will protect existing claimants. That is the very purpose of the announcements we have made today."
      "existing claimants will be protected"
      "protects existing claimants because they have come to rely on that support"
      "They are an existing claimant and they will be assessed—let me be really clear about this—under the existing rules"
      "existing PIP claimants will continue to have that benefit. It will not be affected even if they have a reassessment"

      When she mentions the Timms review in her statements or answers she typically states existing claimants will be protected. Then goes on to mention new claimants then goes on to mention the Timms review changing the descriptors and points. Sometimes in the same sentence she is talking about new claimants sometimes in a new sentence.

      For example :

      "That question was raised previously by another colleague, and the answer is that there will be two sets: the people who are on the existing system, who will be protected; and those who will be on the four points as we go forward. However, the Timms review will indeed look at the descriptors and the different points that they get."

      "Existing claimants will remain on the current rules, even if and when they are reassessed. Changes will come in for new claimants from November 2026, but our review will look, as I have said many times, at the different activities and descriptors, and the points that they will get, because we need to make sure that this vital benefit is sustainable for the future."

      "I want to be clear to the House that the new four-point minimum requirement will come into force in November 2026 for new claims, and existing claimants will be protected. Of course, the Timms review will look at the different descriptors and the points for them in future, but the four-point minimum and the daily living component for new claimants will remain."

      It is possible to read this as her ordering things by the planned time table at the time. 1: 4pt rule existing claimants protected, new claimants affected. 2: Timms review. Or read it as her ordering it as two separate groups. 1: existing claimants protected kept under the old rules. 2: new claimants 4pt rule and as soon as possible new Timms PIP assessment system with changed descriptors and points but retaining the daily living component and 4pt rule.

      MPs appear to have taken it as her referring to two groups. That existing claimants will be protected, kept under the old rules not the new system, as meaning they will not have the 4 pt rule and will not have the new Timms review assessment system changed descriptors and points. And Kendall would have had to be oblivious to this despite their questions and unintentionally repeatedly failing to clarify the government's position. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    skull duggery, they will do and say the total opposite.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    This will have to go, what  about all those  who have mobility problems? Unless they change or add activities to the pip daily living to include certain criteria from ESA  such as the criteria that qualifies you for the support  group such  as  the incontinence desriptor

    "Then, from 2028/29, the WCA will be axed and eligibility for the UC health element will depend upon being in receipt of the daily living component of PIP."
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 days ago
      @John If you have mobility issues  you cannot look for work  this working from  home thing is a farce , as not everyone is good at typing ect  and i wouldn't want to look at a monitor all day, my eyes get strained after a short time,  plus ii have o/a of the wrist and thumb joint  I could not  sit down all day
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @tom I fear the government may treat all those with mobility problems as being able to work from home. So no UC health element. As UC health wouod according to the government provide a perverse incentive to not work. And UC health also results in being exempt from conditionality, except for support conversations, so according to the government being abandoned to the scrap heap.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    Does anybody know if the 13 week transitional pip payment, if you lose your pip award on review, is still happening? I think it was one of kendalls 1st concessions, or is that going to be down to Timms review now.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @maggie No.  It's not happening.  It was just a way to try to appease backbenchers. Never formally introduced. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @maggie Not happening now as the entire PIP section of the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Bill was removed and the bill renamed the Universal Credit Bill.

      If the Timms review PIP changes only apply to new claims it will also not be happening with the Timms review changes. As the point of the 13 week delay was so existing PIP recipients who lost their PIP due to the assessment system changing had time to get other support (what support they were supposed to be able to get was never clarified). 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    Thank you for all your updates.  They are incredibly helpful. 

    I am very concerned about the Timms Review.  This article by Vox Political states that the Government has not legal obligation to implement the results of the Timms Review i.e. They can still go ahead with the PIP 4-point rule.  The clause which would have ensured this was not the case was not supported by MPs.  Can you confirm this?


    Do you know when the results of the Green Paper Consultation will be published?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago
    In the Commons debates Ministers repeatedly told MPs that existing PIP claimants will remain under the current rules, and the new system will only apply to new claimants. And Labour MPs are telling concerned constituents that is what will happen. If the government reneges on this they are likely to suffer a big rebellion again. As the original plan of changing PIP eligibility criteria for existing claimants and so causing them to lose PIP, was the main cause of the rebellion.

    I do not think the government can get away with claiming they only meant the 4 point PIP rule not any changes to descriptors and points made by Timms. As that requires MPs believing Ministers were too thick to understand the questions they were asked and were inadvertently misleading. Rather than being deliberately obtuse to intentionally mislead. Which would cause a lot of bad faith. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @trace I would expect anyone moving from DLA to PIP to be treated as a new claim.

      DLA and PIP are currently treated by the DWP as effectively two separate benefits. Hence no migration of eligibility status DLA High rate care does not passport to PIP Enhanced rate daily, DLA lifetime award does not passport to PIP ongoing/indefinite award. And any legacy benefit premiums from DLA eligibility are not given transitional protection when someone moves to PIP. People are just told your DLA claim is being ended you need to put in a claim for PIP. And their PIP claim is treated as a brand new claim. In theory the DWP can use evidence previously submitted for past DLA claims in making the new PIP award. But in practice they seem to offer doing this and if you say yes, reply to say they cannot find the evidence, have lost it, can you send new evidence please.

      When Kendall talks about legacy benefit claimants being treated as existing claimants. I suspect she is only talking about income based ESA claimants being treated as existing UC claimants. As moving from income based ESA to UC is treated as a continuation. ESA Support group and Work related activity group are passported to UC LCWRA and LCW status, Severe Conditions criteria never reassess membership is passported to UC. And any ESA legacy premiums are given transitional protection when someone moves to UC. And being moved from ESA to UC does not trigger a Work Capability Assessment. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @John What about DLA claimants that have been unfairly forgotten about we haven’t been reassed as Dwp haven’t got round to it we would have been existing claimants but due to their incompetence we haven’t even been moved yet and Will be treated as new claimants. This is wrong and unfair very unfair not our fault they haven’t done it. No one ever mentions us. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @John Where these concessions for existing claimants not scrapped with the 4 point rule? I predict all existing claimants will be reassessed at review time under the new descriptors.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @John John
      I’ve written to my MP  to raise this. She stated last week that we would be protected as current claimants and that because of this and other issues she felt able to support the bill. After this came the next bill now just universal credit. I’ve raised there is confusion now especially with Benefits and Work giving no indication either of who now this effects particularly after all the claims it was new claims only by Liz Kendall. I think the question needs answered.. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @John It was clear that it was the 4 point rule it referred to as that was what was in the bill.  With that rule axed, so was that concession.  You can't keep a concession to an element no longer in the bill.  

      Which is why i said at the time that the final capitulation on the 4 point rule left all 375,000 current claimants with no security going forward.  But was told that I was being selfish in saying that because of the new claimahts who might suffer.  OK, the likelihood is that any rule changes will be current claims only after the curfuffle last week.  But I doubt that will be true of changes to the form and descriptors. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 days ago

    I do not think the government can get away with claiming they only meant the 4 point PIP rule not any changes to descriptors and points made by Timms. As that requires MPs believing Ministers were too thick to understand the questions they were asked and were inadvertently misleading. Rather than being deliberately obtuse to intentionally mislead. Which would cause a lot of bad faith. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @John Liz Kendall's letter was clear.  Its about the changes that have now been axed.  Notiing beyond that was ever mentioned:

      "Firstly, we recognise the proposed changes have been a source of uncertainty and anxiety.

      Therefore, we will ensure that all of those currently receiving Pip will stay within the current system. The new eligibility requirements will be implemented from November 2026 for new claims only."

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.