Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
Daily Express article on PIP -beware
One of our claimants has requested PIP review on the basis of this article from 14/1/22:
Just to flag it up - whatever the intention of the article, it may be very unhelpful to some claimants.
Comments below the article include:
‘The worst part is that you could be in real trouble and you are assessed by someone who is not even a health professional, just a box ticker’
‘’ It makes me seethe to see these articles that you might be able to get PIP. Total nonsense. They will refuse 70% of claims regardless of what you put or your doctor says and make you wait a year to get to the MR Stage.’
Plus, of course, one rant on the lines of ‘It’s amazing how easy it is for some to get a free lifestyle, for life, without ever getting out of bed to earn a living, and contribute to the pot’
agreed on the dangers of such an article…and the “sidetracking” created by (often inaccurate) public comments around such articles…this seems to be the world we live in now.
The reference to Long Covid has some value I suppose….but the list of medical conditions quoted makes it all seem quite prescriptive ...I also note that in that list there is no mention of “Joggers N*pple”, but of course you will never see a N*pple in the Daily Express (sorry couldn’t resist)
[ Edited: 19 Jan 2022 at 10:41 am by Peter Donohue ]It’s an odd article. The crux of it seems to be that the DWP has “confirmed” that there are a list of “19 health conditions” which “qualify for PIP”, however what the article then lists are just the top level disability categories which DWP uses for statistical purposes, such as “musculoskeletal disease” or “psychiatric disorders” and they have nothing whatever to do with actual entitlement.
I suppose that there’s no harm in drawing attention to the existence of PIP and encouraging people who might be entitled to it to make a claim
The problem is it implies you will get PIP if you’ve got the conditions. That’s why my person has asked for a review which may take away his whole award.
For the sake of my own sanity I won’t be reading the comments. Bless the Express web site for further encouraging me to not even read the article thanks to the appalling layout. Nevertheless I got there in the end. Some serious questions arise. I really wouldn’t worry about web site comments. The article itself needs a complaint.
1 - who are the charities doing this “urging”? Not one cited. Ditto the “campaigners” saying you check your finances every 6 months? This smacks of click bait
type encouragement to claim “free money” of the sort the likes of the Express run when they’re running a bit short of claimants to vilify in outlier fraud stories.
2 - PIP can top up benefits? No mention of the fact you can get PIP and work. Presumably wouldn’t get published in the Express.
3 - “Exactly how much PIP someone will receive depends on how their disability affects their ability to work”. You sure about that one Jackie?
4 - Chloe Smith and ““Living with a long-term illness or disability can have a profound effect on daily life, both for those with a diagnosis and those who care for
them,”. You need a diagnosis for PIP? News to me.
5 - Half price off rail fares? Nope. One third.
6 - Someone tell me what “Visual disease” is. Clearly I should not contemplate a claim for PIP if I just have a sight impairment. I’d be fairly confident that Express
readers will believe that “Malignant disease” is something to do with a lack of desire to work.
Is reading the daily express a qualifying condition for PIP?
Is reading the daily express a qualifying condition for PIP?
That made me smile.
What’s the Daily Express?
What’s the Daily Express?
The revised train service between Liverpool and Manchester?
What’s the Daily Express?
The daily mail and the express in one sitting
I thought the daily express was the emptying of ones bowels ?
Fighting such articles is a noble but ultimately futile exercise. Andrew Don Quixote of La Mancha :)
These sorts of article pop up quite frequently on our local news website and are presumably syndicated. They are always misleading because there is no context etc. I have always assumed they were a sort of DWP advertorial (not that I’d be expecting the DWP to encourage people to apply).