A Benefits and Work reader attending a Timms review workshop has been told by a panel member that a short triage call will decide whether claimants are sent a PIP2 claim form or put on a separate assessment route with no cash award at the end of it.  The workshops, part of a £1 million co-production contract, have been criticised for their lack of detailed information and for using tokens and a sheet of coloured paper to get attendees’ feedback.

Token consultation

Benefits and Work has obtained copies of the documents and slides emailed to Timms Review workshop participants prior to online workshops, as well as copies of the paper documents used at in-person workshops.  We have also received  accounts of what took place from attendees of both types of workshop.

The documents show that the written information provided is identical to the very sparse, often unclear, details given in the Timms review September Update.

The workshop material is separated into 24 recommendations and participants divide into groups for four separate sessions, each considering one of the groups of changes.  They then join together, with one person from each group selected by the paid facilitators to give feedback.  The facilitators make notes and provide them to the Timms review itself.

In-person attendees are each given a token and, for every one of the 24 recommendations, they are required to put their token on a communal sheet of paper divided into three coloured bands.

Green represents “Great principle, I am in favour”

Orange represents “Broadly happy but some concerns”

Red represents “Causes real concern”

The number of tokens in each colour band for each recommendation is recorded and the results are fed back to the Timms review.

For the online workshops, attendees use a shared screen where they can drag and drop green stars, orange triangles or red squares onto each question.  Many people were unable to make the software work.

Not co-production

One of the slides provided to participants explained:

“The steering group recognise that these workshops have not been co-produced but are important opportunities to hear directly from people who interact with PIP."

not co produced

A private sector company, The Public Service Consultants, is being paid £1 million for “Professional Services for Co-production Expertise for the Facilitation of the TIMMS Review”.

Disabled people’s organisations, on the other hand have struggled to get any funding at all to carry out Timms review “Workshop in a Box events”.

The same slide also claimed that “Your input is really important to us and will shape the next stages of the Review’s co-production process.”

However, the workshops have a huge amount to get through, with 24 proposals to consider.

But the most consequential issues are left to the final session and the cost-based system for deciding awards does not appear until the very end of the workshop, slide 60 out of 60.  Participants have reported that there was not time to discuss the idea.

cost based

Pathways to nowhere

Although nothing new was put in writing for participants, three members of the Timms review panel attend each workshop to observe and also to answer at least some questions.

One of our readers learnt from a panel member that the proposed model involves an initial triage phone call during which a claimant explains their situation.  They are then placed on an “assessment pathway”.  The panel member explained that, for some, this will be the PIP pathway that allows them to claim a cash benefit and perhaps services as well.  For others, it will be a pathway that may lead to goods or services, or possibly just signposting, but not to a cash award.

If the details given to us are correct, the result could be thousands of potentially arbitrary and unexplained decisions not to allow a PIP claim to go forward.

The panel members did not say whether there would be a right of appeal against the chosen pathway.  But even if there were, it is probable that the appeal would only be about whether the DWP had made a legally correct decision about which pathway to place the claimant on, not about eligibility for PIP.

If triage calls and the abolition of the work capability assessment (WCA) do both go ahead, then the savings on assessment costs will be very considerable.

No light to shed

There were many issues the Timms review panel were unable to shed any light on.

They could not say whether the new system would apply to current claimants when their award comes up for review.

They could not say what would happen to the work capability assessment, even though the way PIP would replace the WCA is one of the things the panel was supposed to explore.

They couldn’t say what would happen to benefits for under-22-year-olds, although these are increasingly being attacked by politicians and the media.

They couldn’t say how a costs-based system would work, though one panel member suggested that this might have to be decided after the Timms review has concluded.

One thing the panel members were able to confirm is that there is no Plan B.  The split-pathways model, leading to a cost-based assessment for some, is the only model they are considering.   

Begin the fight

Participants have bravely tried to extract information from Timms review panel members and to make their views heard.

But, in the end, it seems unlikely that workshop participants placing tokens on coloured paper is going to have a dramatic effect on the outcome of the Timms review. 

The big decisions are almost certainly being made elsewhere and, indeed, have probably already been made

However, there are still more workshops and more opportunities to try to winkle scraps of information from panel members. 

And, most importantly, more opportunities for attendees to reject these shadowy proposals wholesale, marking the first step in the fight to prevent the worst of the Timms Review recommendations ever coming to pass.

Keep up with changes to PIP

The proposals described in this article are not the current PIP rules. The Timms Review has not yet published its final recommendations.

We will be following developments closely and reporting what is proposed, what is confirmed and what it could mean for claimants.

Get our free fortnightly PIP, UC and ESA newsletter and we’ll keep you updated.

GET FREE PIP UPDATES

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    I wonder if this is about getting rid of pip altogether and the mobility sceme if so my wife pip is until 2031 can they just remove it if they scrap pip 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @Wayne Do you know I think you could have something here

      Timms said " pip is not fit for purpose " so is the intention to stop pip altogether as it's "not fit for purpose"  according to Mr Timms .and replace it completely with this new pro to type relating to how much it costs to have a disability? Support in kind offering services instead of a cash payment. They may say your OK until, your next review which will then put people on the new pathway.
      All a bit messy and really isn't going to win them an election for quite sometime I would imagine
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @Rupert You've got the longest PIP award I've read so far across the internet, of course apart from the 10 year awards.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Mike My Awards until 2032.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Wayne Historically it's been difficult for the Gov to withdraw pre-existing awards from claimants, I think if they do go ahead with these reforms those who already have an award will be allowed to keep it as it is until their review date (in your wife's case - 2031), unless of course the claimant has a change of circumstances, etc which forces them to be reviewed early.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    The infantile way they've approached these workshops is abysmal. I used more sophisticated techniques when I held workshops in my job! 
    This triage call sounds very similar to the chat they offered earlier this year that was meant to support you. 
    My call lasted 4 minutes and consisted of the agent asking me if I was able to attend the job centre to which I replied no. I asked if they could send me information on online courses or volunteering to do admin for a charity and was told 'Yes I'll send you the information' this never happened. 
    It wasn't a support call at all it was to see if they could revoke my LCWRA and as soon as the agent realised I can barely speak a full sentence without tics and stutters and that I'm unable to leave the house without support they lost interest. 

    Based on the information in this article the Timms review is just showboating and the decisions have already been made. 
    We need to be ready to mobilise once the result of the review has been published, but for now I think we all need to take a collective breath and wait for the results. I know this isn't an easy thing to do but worrying before anything happens is going to cause you personal harm mentally and potentially physically too. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    @Slb I completely understand the weariness around media speculation and “might/maybe” headlines, but what I am sharing is not guesswork, it comes directly from the source. I attended one of the official Timms Review workshops, where three panel members spoke directly to our group.

    The key misunderstanding is assuming this review is simply about tweaking existing PIP descriptors or point thresholds. It is not. This is a fundamentally new benefit structure, featuring a different assessment methodology, new award mechanisms, and, ultimately, entirely different entitlements for claimants.

    These are not media rumours; they are concrete proposals currently being presented at official workshops. While the formal government announcement is expected in late November, waiting for that usually means waiting until the ink is already dry.

    I have already raised the issues with my own MP. Doing so now gives MPs the information they need to challenge the proposals before they are finalised, and to scrutinise the legislation properly when it arrives. If people are uneasy about the direction this is taking, this is the moment to contact their MP.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @Mollie Thank you, I think that makes sense that a very big reveal is coming. That alone with the article itself at the top. This is indeed very concerning.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @Mollie Well I can honestly state that this was not discussed at my workshop I participated in, and no opinion was sought on a completely different way of assessment. So if it is as you state, it was completely misleading and no value whatsoever, but I would be very nervous about worrying people, before the proposals are published.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Mollie My MP is reform 😭 ive got no chance of them caring
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Mollie Concrete proposals apparently completely lacking specific details. So no one has any specifics on who will and will not qualify and what those who do qualify will receive in terms of cash benefits or support in kind. Making the review workshops a bad joke. Designed to enable the Timms Review to claim disabled people agree with the principles of their purposed new PIP system. When disabled people have not seen the new system.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Mollie Thank you, Mollie.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    Andy Burnham said at the beginning of his taking on the prime minister role that he didn't believe in crude cuts

    The Labour Party conference in Liverpool the slogan states
    HOPE AGAIN.


    There are crude cuts coming we can read them here
    There is NO HOPE AGAIN for people with disabilities or long term health conditions 
    Just remember all these recommendations should they go through will loose Labour the next election this is not an election winner
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @shadowpony What if you have different needs. I think a large number of people have both physical and psychological conditions or disabilities. Personal example I need help on a practical level for psychological things but also have bladder and bowel issues that require purchases of products to manage that. One person who i have have me i pay directly, using pip. She is self employed. So what happens to all the self employed people currently employing people with pip money?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @D s the triple lock proposals won't mean cuts to pensions, they will only stop the run away multiplyer. unlike these proposals if they go ahead. this could result in a person being proscribed set amount of services based on a phone call. and what if needs fluctuate month to month?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Kitkat Labour won't lose the Election through Benefit Cuts theirs much Bigger Issues.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Kitkat This incompetent government are hell bent on punishing the elderly and disabled. They gave themselves 5’/, pay rise taking their salary to 138,000 for being incompetent. How about a pay cut , maybe then we will respect them. A bunch of incompetent people with no experience 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    This is ridiculous.  For the last five years, we have been warned of this, that and the other, with so called news that is full of the words "could," "might" and "maybe.". None of it has come to pass.  Nobody can do anything until plans are announced anyway.  

    At the moment, instead of living their lives, people are obsessing over things that may not happen, and about which they can do nothing until an announcement has been made. You can't start a campaign against something when you don't even know what that something is!

     And as I have said before, making such supposition part of a "news" story is irresponsible and needlessly scaring the crap out of people who are already struggling mentally - and that goes for news outlets and those running this website.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @Slb I agree with you totally. I skim read anything on here and in the mainstream media about politics/benefits/Trump/Putin etc. Dramatic fiction is how I see it! The words news needs to be deleted. It's like gossip/chinese whispers - lets guess, speculate and make up when there are gaps, all with a negative/dramatic bias. All that actually needs to be written are words... No New Facts Today. A waste of our time and energy!! I CHOOSE to dip in and out again and then focus on living and self care. I have enough mental health issues daily, without seeking 'writings' of this nature.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @D
      Thank you!   Let's hope there are still people able and willing to fight.   I have been fighting for all my support through severe illness, and I have no more fight in me..  but still so much ahead..  
      Thank God for all those good people!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Slb I think many of the disability organisations, forums and individuals are interested in what the worst case scenario looks like so a counter argument can be prepped so if/when the worst scenario is officially announced we are in the position to react straightaway (as the gov will try and move very quickly along with any controversial reforms, the disabled community has to outpace the gov if there’s going to be any chance to successfully challenge or stop it in its tracks)

      I get what you are saying - why prep or worry about a scenario that may not happen?

      To that I say it’s better to over prepare for all rumoured scenarios then only tackling things when they arise and the clock officially starts.

      McFadden is already in public (and probably privately too) appealing for Labour backbenchers to support pip reform take 2 in whatever form they come in.

      It’s possible the dwp do have plan b, c, d onwards on the pip reform plans but implying to the workshops they only have the one strategy (and it’s pretty much penned in - or that’s the illusion they want to give, that there’s no wiggle room).

      The starting gun may not of officially started but the ‘games’ have already begun

      Labour backbenchers are likely unaware of any of the rumours or following these workshops like disabled individuals are.

      Those in a Labour backbencher’s constituency’s should be keeping them up to date of the info coming out of these workshops in any format of communication they can think of.

      Whether this policy (if officially announced) gets implemented will come down to Labour backbenchers swing and it’s smart to get them rejecting a hypothetical now then wait and try to get them onside before official announcements as McFadden is already working on those backbencher numbers

      This benefits & work post is a good starting point for a draft letter - a letter template summarising things coming out of these workshops workshop that could be added to as more ‘leaks’ would be a useful resource to start sending Labour backbenchers now if anyone on here is willing to compile & share
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    A mini phone assessment before the actual assessment sound stressful as hell

    And this triage call sounds like an early opportunity for the dwp to exclude certain disabilities from claiming (you know they’ll mark ‘does not qualify for pip’ the moment a claimant mentions they have a hot button disability like adhd or autism.

    Sounds like they’ve already decided what they are doing if they are only considering one option (what’s the point of these workshops if they aren’t considering more than one option - it’s a tick box exercise so the dwp can claim that they’ve collaborated with disabled - it’s beyond dishonest)

    And on the subject of dishonesty the dwp are going down roads Labour ministers promised they wouldn’t

    This is a totally new award that is being proposed and needs a new ‘plot of land & foundations’ as the current pip ‘building’ is totally unsuitable- the only reason to reform pip rather than introduce a new benefit is so to rush things out.

    Serious question: the rumours aren’t going away on a nov 2026 to summer 2027 snap election -the disabled community are organised enough in the end of tactical voting. Are you still going to vote Labour if that is the tactical vote in your constituency to keep reform/torys out (though it’s a 3 party way race to the bottom 3 way tie in relation to disability welfare?

    Thankfully another party is the strategic vote in my constituency but I’m not sure I could vote for Labour right now 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @Scorpion Scorpion - you know this type, all nice words and a stab in the back.  You are so right, that's exactly what they could be doing.. Like levelling payments for new claimants, and then, for the old claimants, levelling down and down...
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @JBob1234 "or given permanent protection of their award amounts as long as they still qualify."

      How would the DWP find out that claimants still qualify without reassessment! I don't think there would be two parallel assessment formats in place - a new one for the new claimants and the current one for the existing claimants.

      Make no mistake, Timms Review is just a cover for cuts to PIP in one way or another, which would lead to spending cuts in welfare, which is the whole purpose of this review without saying it but sugarcoating it by claiming the current PIP is dehumanising, stressful, and not fit for purpose, to fool the unsuspecting gullible minds and make them believe that the review is in favour of claimants, while it's all about restricting eligibility and awards, and cutting welfare despite Timms initial assurances that this review is not for spending cuts. Of course, he'll never say that the purpose of this review is PIP cuts.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @JBob1234 I agree a new award replacing pip would give current claimants a little breathing space and a little transitional protection

      These plans do suggest a totally new award.

      However new awards cost thousands to implement and switch to and a lot of time to switch over legacy claimants (case and point - pip took millions to implement and over a decade to switch over legacies) - the gov & have neither the time nor themoney to do things properly.

      I could be wrong but I think we are looking at a round hole, square peg type bodge up job from McFadden and co (turning a abattoir into a mosque situation instead of a more suitable building)

      What I’m saying is I don’t even trust McFadden and dwp to implement a crap idea via normal protocol for basically a totally new benefit (as these ideas are nothing like the current pip - the only thing the same is the name imo

      I’m expecting this long running stitch up (over wise known as the timms review) to continue doing the complete opposite to ‘full collaboration with disabled community’ for the foreseeable future
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @D
      D "This is a totally new award that is being proposed and needs a new ‘plot of land & foundations’ as the current pip ‘building’ is totally unsuitable- the only reason to reform pip rather than introduce a new benefit is so to rush things out."

      Reforming PIP rather than abolishing PIP and creating a new benefit also means there is the possibility of existing PIP claimants being given some protection. Possibly honouring existing awards, including ongoing/indefinite awards not being reassessed, all pre-existing claims being kept on the old system, or given permanent protection of their award amounts as long as they still qualify, or given transitional protection.

      Unlike when DLA for working age people was abolished and claimant were told their DLA claims were being ended and they might like to apply for a new benefit PIP. No honouring of existing awards, including no honouring of life time/indefinite awards, no maintaining of the legacy benefit, no transitional protection.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    No harm but the tokens and sheets sounds like what little children play with in nursery school. Never mind the rest of it but I find that particularly bizarre. From what I can take into my head,which isn't much right now the entire thing reads like a shambles. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @D I agree with every word you have written.  It is already so difficult for people with disabilities to obtain employment within a workforce which doesn't want them there.  As for the idea of swapping cash payments for support services which, even where they exist, would be much more expensive to provide because the people providing them would expect to be paid a professional fee, I can't see it happening.  I'm worried it's just an excuse to cut benefits to the bone to appease the right-wing media, which is only supportive of disabled people when they are competing as paralympians.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @TheDogmother (The original) The gov treats disabled as if we have the intellectuality of (young) children but also want us to be employed in jobs so we can undertake the adult activity of paying taxes!

      It’s all very contradictory

      (Another one is workplaces not adapting to the disabled individual and forcing them to mask disability and symptoms so not to be an inconvenience to the same workplace - societal attitudes on disability needs to change first before any disability cuts/reforms are implemented as right now very few disabled have little chance of navigating through the most hostile disability phobic uk society in my lifetime without obtaining psychological scars and open wounds in the process)

       
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    This is getting ridiculous now.
    All i am hearing is Mp's are serious about cutting welfare..and costs costs costs! It's been going on for months. I'm terrified and starting to have thoughts of not wanting to be here.
    There MUST be some Labour Mp's who will defend us and stop this continued cruelty.
    Backbenchers need to mobilise and have the same passion they had about the last round of PIP cuts that was overturned. We all need a glimmer of hope
    I'm terrified. X

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Mandy Its making my conditions worse   the worry oc it all  Mandy I feel the same   hugs


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @Daniel 🙏🙏
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Mandy exactly, I'm sick to death of hearing MPs and the media bang on about us every single day, they can't keep us out of their mouths! 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    I think the best thing we can do is take a deep breath and try not to worry! Easier said than done I know but remember, this is just a review! Nothing set it stone and look what the backbenchers did last time?? Hoping the same will happen again!? As for the tories Kemi needs to
    Wind her neck in. Claiming 2.7 million a year in expenses for her second home, these people are out of touch and out of reality. I challenge any one of them to live a year in the life of a disabled claimant and they’ll soon see it’s not a lifestyle choice! 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    How can we stop this??? We all need to come together and fight, our voices need to be heard. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Worried lady I completely understand and agree with You, I am worried,too
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    Hi everyone,

    I couldn’t find any pre-made letter templates online to challenge the Timms Review draft recommendations published on 9th September 2026, so I created one with the help of AI using key policy points from the recent Disability Rights UK briefing and structure from my May 2026 Call for Evidence submission.

    I’ve removed my own specific lived experience examples and personal information to keep it confidential and flexible and replaced them with [INSERT] or [DELETE] etc.
    I’m posting it here in case it’s helpful to others who want to send a formal complaint to Sir Stephen Timms and their local MP without having to draft something from scratch. Feel free to copy, adapt, and share it.

    EXAMPLE LETTER TEMPLATE: Complaint - Timms Review Draft Recommendations (Sept 2026)

    TO: Sir Stephen Timms MP (Minister for Social Security and Disability & Co-Chair, The Timms Review) Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)
    CC:
    [YOUR LOCAL MP NAME] MP (Member of Parliament for [YOUR CONSTITUENCY])
    Debbie Abrahams MP (Chair, Work and Pensions Select Committee)
    Clerk, Work and Pensions Select Committee
    Officers of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Disability

    SUBJECT: Formal Complaint & Feedback: Timms Review Draft Recommendations (Sept 2026) — Rejection of Non-Cash Awards, Cost Categories, and Deficit in Co-Production

    DATE: [ADD DATE)

    Dear Sir Stephen Timms and Steering Group Co-Chairs,

    I am writing to formally lodge a complaint and submit urgent feedback regarding the Timms Review Draft Recommendations published on 9th September 2026.

    I am an individual living with [INSERT - disability / disabilities, health conditions, and living arrangements if appropriate]. I submitted detailed written evidence to the Review's Call for Evidence in May 2026, to ensure the reality of living with long term, complex, multiple, invisible, fluctuating condition(s) [DELETE - as appropriate] was properly understood.

    Having reviewed the September draft recommendations, I align myself fully with the briefing issued by Disability Rights UK (DR UK) challenging these proposals. The current direction of travel undermines the core purpose of PIP and threatens the independence, health, and financial stability of disabled people.

    Opposition to the Draft Recommendations (DR UK Key Points Backed by My Lived Experience)

    1. Opposition to Non-Cash Support and Restricted "Cost Categories"
    • DR UK Position: PIP must remain a 100% cash-based benefit. Replacing cash awards with "services, vouchers, or non-cash support" and restricting claims to rigid "cost categories" (e.g., equipment, transport, clothing) strips disabled people of choice, control, and autonomy while creating extensive administrative burdens.
    • My Lived Experience: Everyone’s personal circumstances are completely different, and every individual has unique needs and associated costs. My disability-related costs are complex, non-standardised, and essential for managing my specific conditions. I rely on cash PIP to pay for [INSERT - Discuss additional costs related to your specific disability if comfortable]. Forcing non-cash alternatives or pre-approved categories would destroy the self-management strategies that keep me functioning [DELETE – If not applicable]. [INSERT - Discuss lack of NHS or social care support for your specific disability if appropriate].

    2. Failure to Account for Real World Costs
    • DR UK Position: Pre-approved cost categories fail to cover the true, real-world overheads of independent living, risking deeper poverty and health deterioration for disabled people.
    • My Lived Experience: [INSERT - Discuss general living costs e.g. housing costs not covered by disability benefits and/or independent living overheads related to your specific situation].

    3. Rejection of Differential Pathways and "Hierarchies of Disability"
    • DR UK Position: Introducing different assessment pathways or cost categories based on impairment type risks creating an unfair "hierarchy of disability" based on government perception rather than actual need.
    • My Lived Experience: [INSERT - Discuss how the system or descriptors fail your specific disability / disabilities].

    4. Severe Psychological Impact and Risk to Health Recovery
    • DR UK Position: Replacing cash support with restrictive non-cash models causes worsening health, distress, and poverty outcomes for disabled people.
    • My Lived Experience: [INSERT - Discuss the mental/physical impact of continuous benefit uncertainty or reassessment stress on your specific disability].

    5. Breakdown of Genuine Co-Production and Exclusionary Workshops
    • DR UK Position: The Review has failed to demonstrate genuine co-production, relying on top-down processes rather than equal power-sharing with disabled people.
    • My Lived Experience: Prior to the draft recommendations, the Review promoted "Workshop in a Box" initiative sessions, yet I found no suitable or accessible sessions advertised in my region or online. Furthermore, when I applied for a place in the official "Shaping Recommendations" workshops, I was not allocated a place. Restricting co-production workshop slots excludes thousands of claimants. Gathering consultation data without granting disabled people shared decision-making power over final drafts is not genuine co-production.

    6. Absolute Separation of PIP from Work Capability
    • DR UK Position: PIP must not be used as a passport or gateway to the health component of Universal Credit or work capability assessments.
    • My Lived Experience: PIP exists to help meet the extra costs of disability and support independent living. Merging or linking PIP with work capability assessments or conditionality creates immense insecurity, particularly for individuals whose health has deteriorated through trying to sustain work [DELETE if not applicable].

    Systemic Context / Conclusion

    PIP cannot be viewed in isolation from the wider breakdown in healthcare and social support and cost of living and housing crisis. [INSERT – Discuss further if needed or summarise key themes].

    Actions Requested

    Before any final recommendations are presented to Parliament or Ministers, I urge the Steering Group and the DWP to take the following actions:
    1. Reaffirm PIP as an All-Cash Benefit: Explicitly drop all proposals involving vouchers, service substitutions, or restrictive cost categories, maintaining the 100% cash structure that protects individual autonomy.
    2. Abandon Differential Pathways: Ensure assessment processes treat all health conditions and impairments equitably based on lived impact rather than diagnostic groupings.
    3. Reopen Accessible Digital Feedback Channels: Provide open, asynchronous digital consultation mechanisms so individuals excluded from limited workshop slots can critique and challenge the 9th September draft recommendations.
    4. Extend the Review Schedule: Slow down the timeline to allow Disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs), the Work and Pensions Select Committee, and claimants adequate time to scrutinise proposals.
    5. Publish Co-Production Audits: Publish transparent metrics demonstrating how written submissions from the May 2026 Call for Evidence were evaluated and incorporated into the draft recommendations.

    I request a formal written response acknowledging this complaint and outlining how my May 2026 submission and these objections will be addressed before final recommendations are submitted to Government. I am happy to share my full Call for Evidence submission (May 2026) again, which is available on request.

    Yours sincerely,

    [YOUR NAME]
    [YOUR CONSTITUENCY / POSTCODE]
    Email: [YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS]

    EMAIL ADDRESSES TO SEND LETTER TO:
    TO:
    • timmss@parliament.uk
    • ministers@dwp.gov.uk
    CC:
    • workpencom@parliament.uk
    • appgdisability@parliament.uk
    • [INSERT APPG EMAIL FOR YOUR SPECIFIC DISABILITY / DISABILITIES IF APPLICABLE]
    • [INSERT YOUR LOCAL MP'S EMAIL ADDRESS]
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Anon 101 Spot on , very well said and explained from You , thanks for that, They need to read this, everyone, You're speaking for all of us and I thank You , because We're all worried,more since I heard the Tory party manifesto about welfare, absolutely unfair.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    @bB   I think your workshop must have been very different to the one I attended. In ours, we had to score the “Assessment framework key principles” section, including point 9, which stated that there will be a light‑touch initial assessment to understand a person’s circumstances and direct them to the most appropriate assessment pathway. It also said this will be as simple as possible to reduce the administrative burden. That was presented as the formal gateway to the whole model, not just a casual pre‑screen.

    They did not mention filling in a PIP form at all, and they did not mention descriptors. They made it sound like the triage call replaces the current PIP process entirely.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Mollie Yes I agree with what you’ve written but I saw it not as part of the ‘clinical’ decision making of a pip claim, more to see how the claim should be best handled, perhaps to do with disability type/ age/ location/ state preference as to assessment being online/ at home etc . It was certainly never mentioned it would end a claim, but I can only go by what we were told.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    I don't understand. I'm so frightened. I have all the aids and adaptations I need, that's what OTs and DFGs are for. I need to be able to eat and heat and pay ongoing extra expenses of being disabled. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    Yeah, that sounds well thought through. I’ve a feeling it’s not going to be pretty
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 24 days ago
    This is terrifying 
    But also begs the question, how is it both vital, should remain as non means tested cash and not fit for purpose?
    This isn’t co-production 
    This isn’t keeping PIP as a vital lifeline for disabled people 
    If one phone call can lead to just sign posting and services instead of money, that certainly doesn’t cover the financial costs of being disabled. 
    We need to fight this, or hope that it doesn’t end up in the final review. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 24 days ago
    I attended workshop. I agree the latter more consequential issues were left to end, and had less time spent. It was all very vague, and the initial issues were mostly no brainers, which used up time unnecessarily. 
    The initial phone call triage, I didn’t get exactly the same vibe about. I thought it was more to direct to the appropriate pathway ie end of life for instance as a pre screen, but who knows. I didn’t understand that anybody would be rejected, unless perhaps they  stated they hadn’t had the condition for long enough, or would be ineligible for some other reason like first applying after pension age. I might be wrong, and we are all naturally suspicious of dwp stuff, but I think we should wait and watch on this, so as not to alarm prematurely. The only thing that was rejected out of hand in my group was the non cash payments for unspecified reasons.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 24 days ago
    If this were to go ahead it is already making me think the DWP workers will exploit this. They will be signing most people to other services. What other services actually exist after all the cuts to services. The whole thing fills me with dread. Let’s hope it doesn’t go ahead. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 24 days ago
      @Anniesmum @Anniesmum I see what you mean like dwp workers being told and given incentives to get people off the phone and fob them off to services that don’t exist it fills me with dread too like I said below if they then link all this to a new uc health will only be left with uc jobseekers and sanctions and I don’t want any part of that 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 24 days ago
    And if you’ve been so traumatised by the current PIP process that an initial triage call will not be possible? 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 24 days ago
    Anything about the PIP Claim form itself. Will that be changed radically?? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 24 days ago
      @Alprocherry They didn’t know. This was asked.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 24 days ago
    Absolute joke, just as expected.  NO to the whole lot of it!

    This needs stopping right now.

PIP & The WCA Are Changing- Get The Latest News

Stay updated with our free, fortnightly newsletter.

Over 140,000 claimant and professional subscribers.

 
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.