Means tested benefits -P.I.P. Email to MP

This is the email I have sent to my MP (West Bromwich)


I am contacting you out of sheer desperation and fear and am hoping you will take note of my words and fight on my behalf and that of others in the same situation as I.

My husband and I are very ill in different ways and as such both claim the highest rate of P.I.P.

This money is vital for us. It helps pay for things like extra heating and electrical medical equipment for my husband. For myself, taxis to vital medical appointments. I suffer with agoraphobia and have mobility issues amongst other disabilities. I cannot cope with public transport.

If our P.I.P benefit were to be means tested, I have worked out that we would not have enough money to survive. Our lives would not be worth living and I would not be able to continue keeping my husband safe and well.

I feel I would not be able to continue living in this world where we, the most vulnerable and disabled continue to be at a disadvantage and treated as if we don’t matter.

Please, please can you fight against such a political decision should this be a real threat.

I look forward to hearing back from you with your thoughts.

Regards

Let’s see if I get a response

Hi all, I have just sent this e mail to my MP.

Dear XX XXXXX

I am writing to ask for your support should the rumour about means-testing certain benefits including PIP come to be.

Should the unlikely happen, I would be badly affected. I reached state pension age earlier this year, and consequently cashed in my private pensions.

If I had to subsidise myself should my be PIP stopped, my savings would quickly run out and I would be soon be claiming housing benefit and anything else I may be entitled to as a consequence.

There must be countless people in a similar position to myself who would become a burden on the state through no fault of their own.

I ask you to please support the likes of me and put a stop to this before it gathers support from any of your colleagues.

I will sign off for now and am really hoping for your help should it be needed.

Regards,

Mr P.

Dear xxxxx MP

I trust one and all are well and that the autumnal weather is pleasant.
Let's hope it keeps mild, if possible, to keep the horrendously high utility bills down as much as possible.

There has been worrying rumblings on the wire about the idea that certain benefits maybe become means tested to be able to be received.

I do so hope this is a rumbling that has no credence or founding.

Many such as I, wholly rely on these benefits, such PIP, Personal Independence Payment for one.

I receive it following a motorcycle accident whilst undertaking my duties as an Environmental Health Officer.
It was given to me via Herts County Council following the accident at work, along with Employment and Support Allowance rather than receiving a full local govt pension as the Human Resource dept felt it would be better as my health deteriorated.

The Secretary of State further supplemented in a letter a provision to retain the mobility component and the ability to move abroad if the health would be better if not in the UK.

However, that latterly has been removed due to govt changes.

Thus, I now only receive PIP, care component and from April next year my state pension as I will be 66. I then lose the ESA.
PIP is retained along with my Industrial Injury Health pension hopefully.

If PIP was to become means tested, I would lose it along with the IIHP and then will only have my state pension to live on.

My husband supplements my living as it is by providing payment for the high utility bills and care bills etc.

I do not receive any other works pension or other as it was deemed better to be on benefits, and I did not receive a large payment following the accident as the insurance company were assured that the local govt would deal with that. So caught wrongly again.

Many people such as I, employed within local govt, teaching and the NHS etc were caught in this dilemma back in the 90's and were dealt a wrong hand, more so women, and then it was compounded with the age change to state pension for those ladies born in the 50's.

Those of us on non means tested benefits do Not receive the added extras that means tested people receive, thus meaning we are on much reduced incomes.

However, if the benefits we are on were means tested, we would be worse off, as we would have to wholly rely on family, husband, or children's income and be totally reliant upon them.

I think this is an intolerable move on the part of the govt to deny myself and others some semblance of dignity, in removing this little bit of benefit finance to ourselves.

I have used my situation to show what would happen if these benefits were to be made means tested.
It would affect many people and they too may have been cheated into taking a wrongful benefit rather than a pension from their employers as it was an easy option for employers to use in the 90's.

I truly hope you will oppose this rumbling of an idea to means test such benefits.
Or at least if it were to be put in place, should only be for new recipients and only in certain circumstances.

If I had been provided with a local govt pension, I would be financially secure rather than each month worrying if my monies would be stopped and terrified when an assessment will be conducted.
None of which is good for one's health be it physical or mental and the thought now that this mediocre benefit being removed due to be it being means tested is beyond the pale.

I do hope I and others have your backing in you not accepting such a change to the benefit system.

Regards
XXXXXXX

reply from my MP
Dear XXXXX

Thank you for your email of yesterday.

I appreciate that people across the country are eager to know what the Chancellor will or will not announce in his Autumn Statement on 17th November, but it would not be right for me to prejudge the Chancellor’s Statement by speculating on individual policy measures.

The Secretary of State’s decision not to comment on whether disability benefits would be means-tested or not when asked in the House of Commons Chamber on 31st October should not be regarded as either a confirmation or denial that they will go ahead but rather as compliance with a long-standing convention that Ministers simply do not provide a running commentary on what may or may not be in a major fiscal event.

I can, however, confirm what the Prime Minister and Chancellor have said themselves, namely that compassion and fairness will be at the heart of everything this Government does.

Although the country faces a profound economic challenge and difficult decisions do need to be made, I am confident that the Government will do all it can to protect the most vulnerable. I am afraid that in advance of any Financial Statement, the ‘rumour mill’ is rather busy and this inevitably causes people like yourself a great deal of concern.

Best wishes