[JD6]

Talking to a friend recently, he pointed out that quite a few of the benefit fraud type cases which appear in the local paper involve people who have claimed an extreme physical disability and yet have been living a normal active life for many years or even decades before they are caught. As an outsider, it is impossible to tell if this fraud happens a lot, and those who are caught are the exceptions, or if those who do this tend to get caught.

We then wondered what would happen if certain elements of benefit claims were routinely made public. For example if you claim not to be able to walk for 20 metres unaided, or not to be able to go to the shops or carry a shopping bag etc., then what happens if that limited information is placed in the public domain.

Clearly it is an intrusion into the claimant's privacy, but it would make exaggerating a disability very difficult to do. It may be completely unworkable and lead to vast numbers of neighbours reporting each other out of spite, or it may not.

Obviously most claim information must remain private, but is the idea of some public disclosure of a physical disability claim likely to have the desired effect, and is it an intrusion too far?

[JD6]

Originally Posted by Lobb

Data Protection Act.

This would need new rules, and possibly even new laws, but the DPA needn't be an obstacle if as part of the claim process you agreed to limited public disclosure.

[HighlandPete]

Interesting, but a very complex subject.

I've got a family member who has suffered epilepsy from her youth, completely messed her life. She has tried working, but stress is a major trigger to multiple seizures. Drugs have never sorted the condition, and have led to other health complications.

From the outside she may look completely normal to other folks, particularly when someone is with her to take the stress points away.

I'd not want someone who doesn't fully understand the situation, making the judgements on whether "they think" she is capable of work.

[Tengocity]

I think this one of the most stupid ideas I've heard. Sounds like something straight out of the North Korean/communist big brother playbook, that completely over rides any sense of the concept of the private citizen.

Whilst it sounds vaguely sensible on the narrow example, it would come at cost to society and privacy that could hardly be worth it. Never mind the fact that most people are not medically trained, nor aware of anything like the full facts of a claimants situation.

[JD6]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

Interesting, but a very complex subject.

I've got a family member who has suffered epilepsy from her youth, completely messed her life. She has tried working, but stress is a major trigger to multiple seizures. Drugs have never sorted the condition, and have led to other health complications.

From the outside she may look completely normal to other folks, particularly when someone is with her to take the stress points away.

I'd not want someone who doesn't fully understand the situation, making the judgements on whether "they think" she is capable of work.

I would completely understand not wanting others to judge whether someone was capable of work. That clearly wouldn't be possible. This suggestion was a much narrower - where someone makes a claim of a severe physical disability such as not being able to walk more than 20 metres, that is something which an unqualified person could reasonably assess.

It may be that there is no merit in the whole idea at all, but it did seem odd to both of us that someone can make a claim of not being able to walk and then carry on their life normally, with little chance of getting caught.

[JD6]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

I think this one of the most stupid ideas I've heard. Sounds like something straight out of the North Korean/communist big brother playbook, that completely over rides any sense of the concept of the private citizen.

Whilst it sounds vaguely sensible on the narrow example, it would come at cost to society and privacy that could hardly be worth it. Never mind the fact that most people are not medically trained, nor aware of anything like the full facts of a claimants situation.

There certainly is an unpleasant Big Brother element to this. To some extent it exists already and the public are encouraged to report benefit cheats, but generally they don't know what physical limitation has been claimed.

I could only imagine this functioning in a very narrow way, such as being unable to walk, or carry a bag, where an unqualified person could see if that was true. It certainly couldn't apply to mental illness.

Perhaps this is just far too toxic and likely to encourage spiteful behaviour.

[isleaiw1]

Originally Posted by JD6

It may be that there is no merit in the whole idea at all, but it did seem odd to both of us that someone can make a claim of not being able to walk and then carry on their life normally, with little chance of getting caught.

No more odd really than the self employed submitting accounts they prepare themselves along with tax comps they do themselves and very limited checks and balances to make sure they are accurate - unless you happen to trigger one of their "it looks odd" filters....

[....,,,,..,,..]

Remember not all disabilities have an obvious physical disability.

Usually people are shopped by friends, neighbours, Ex's etc.

Usually they are self employed and taking the piss.

Also a lot they get are accidental where someone is not aware.

Those twats that really take the piss are invariably experts at it.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by JD6

There certainly is an unpleasant Big Brother element to this. To some extent it exists already and the public are encouraged to report benefit cheats, but generally they don't know what physical limitation has been claimed.

I could only imagine this functioning in a very narrow way, such as being unable to walk, or carry a bag, where an unqualified person could see if that was true. It certainly couldn't apply to mental illness.

Perhaps this is just far too toxic and likely to encourage spiteful behaviour.

I'm not sure that thresholds for payments are based on such narrow specific activities, but rather an assessment of how your condition impacts a range of activities that someone would be expected to do.

Certainly if I think back to when my parents were able to claim extra support when my mums cancer was more advanced it was down to an assessment of a wide range of things.

Also, in the case of more long term and chronic issues it has to be considered that people go through better and worse phases, and that's the nature of the illnesses some have. So having people who are genuinely ill worrying about how it will look to others when they're having a good day would be seem perverse.

For the minority who are cheating I really wouldn't want to put the rest of society through that kind of thinking.

[GEP77]

It is highly likely through a freedom of information request you could find out how many people are claiming what level of benefits. It may even be possible to get the data on the number of each 'class' of disability (mental health, physical etc etc.).

Beyond that you are at real risk of identifying people and that would be a breach of the Data Protection Act.

As a a general rule if someone boasts about being on benefits then by all means drop a polite note to https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud

A person who genuinely needs benefits will in my experience never boast, in fact they will often be terrified of losing them or having them reduced and in the case of disability it can be a real struggle for some to get them in the first place, especially in the case of a mental disability as the assessment process just isn't geared up to accommodate them.

[Kal101]

There are plenty out there that do take the piss and I've seen plenty. Just look at the rash of mobility scooters that suddenly appeared when disability allowance became stricter.

Think that the big brother idea whilst has some perceivable benefits is open to a lot of abuse and misdirection.

The culture of people and their cohorts who this sort of thing is that it's ok to scam the system but not to grass on their cohorts.

The option is already there to report benefits cheats and sme time ago the government was offering a small financial reward to disclose- still never took off.

As said not all disabilities are visible and regard this a bit like letting old codgers loose with speed guns.