I agree, many that do in fact claim ESA because they 'fit' one or more of the descriptors and have obtained 15 points or more could or can work, some with minor adjustments, some with major adjustments. These are the ones that should be in the WRAG. Unfortunately there are some in the WRAG that belong in the Support Group. These are those that never bothered to appeal against the poor decision and those that didn't bother to put up a strong enough case. Until the government sort out their poor decision making, they shouldn't be considering this.

If the DWP did their job right and put the sick/disabled into the correct groups in the first place we wouldn't be having this discussion. If the WRAG was only for those with time limited illnesses and disabilities that could be easily overcome in the workplace, then yes that group should be gearing up ready to go back to work. However we have many claimants in the support group and the WRAG with identical illnesses/conditions that affect them in identical ways. Until the DWP get the assessing procedure right, then the government can't do much. Seriously ill people with long term conditions and often life threatening illnesses being put in the WRAG is plain and simply wrong. On the other hand putting people in the Support Group that get there only because they find it extremely difficult to get their mobile out of their jacket top pocket is also plain stupid. The descriptors and the whole assessing procedure needs sorting. I also fear that the same will happen with PIP with some with being given the higher rates for nonsense type descriptors. Yet very vulnerable people who don't fit any of the 'boxes' (descriptors) will be on their backsides out of it. I know what I would do - I would go back to the old system of assessment by medical board.

£132!!! Good grief where in the SE is that!!! The area we live in - the Romney Marsh/ bordering close to Rye/Tenterden. What seems to affect our area (Shepway) is that it includes both Folkestone/Dover both of which are very run down with seriously poor (cheap) housing stock. I know that if I searched just a few miles to Rye/Sevenoaks or Ashford, the LHA increases to something like your figure. Rother (Rye) £115.38 Ashford £116.74 Canterbury £117.92 High Weald £132.69 for a 1 bed It's horses for courses - 1 bed in the Weald area you will end up paying a min of £595 a month (£137.31 a week) In the middle of Dover - 1 bed would cost a min of £260 a month (£60 a week)

In my case, he didn't mention the fact that I was leaning heavily on my walking stick held in my right hand and pushed the door lever down with my left arm and leant on the door to open it! He also didn't question who had in fact dressed me that morning - my poor wife did, as she always does when we go out - maybe I should have turned up in my pyjamas and dressing gown as that is how I am dressed most days when I don't go out. In fact she was never invited into the room with me and would have mentioned that fact if asked.

Are your benefit payments still suspended?

Our area in the South East pays this for a 1 bed property This equates to £375 a month I've just had a look on rightmove and just in my immediate area there are 3 pages of 1 beds to rent! If I look at an area of 1 mile away it goes up to 4 pages of properties. The rents start at £260 a month and go up to £375 a month. If you give me the first part of the postcode I'll see what is available. The other rates are

What a read!!! I could well have been that mole!!!! Totally true - all of it. I like the bit about being middle class, of a certain age and looking at suitable employment within certain professions. From experience it happens as it is printed. However to be honest, you shouldn't just make the DWP/JC out to be the lone wolf in all of this. In the government dept I worked in there were targets galore!! Some you honestly wouldn't believe. There was even a league table of regions then offices that could get the highest number of prosecutions, get the highest number of Bankruptcy Restriction Orders and even targets with league tables for lowly IPA's. How was that done? You offer no help or advice on what a customer is entitled to deduct from his income, you simply ask what he thinks he should be allowed to deduct from his income to arrive at a surplus of income. Guaranteed to be £100's less than what he should be deducting. With the right advice he would have a surplus to pay to the OR of say £35 a week. Without guidance and advice you could probably screw £200 a week out of him. I should know, our office was up there month after month at the top finding every opportunity of getting the maximum amount of money in. Our Dept actually made a profit every year and had to hand over the surplus to the mother dept - the Dept of Bus & Enterprise - when Mr Darling was the SoS which was permanently in the red with it's budget. Targets = bonuses, the higher up the table you are, the bigger the bonus. It still happens in all government depts. - it's the only way to keep staff motivated after being told to do twice the work load for the same pay. And dare any officer even suggest that they should be helping the public - not persecuting them!!!! As for the public trusting the civil servants - at their peril!! Manipulation has been rife for many years now just as long as the end result is what you desire. At one time they could be trusted - now - you play on the fact that the public have no real idea of their rights. I have seen written statements taken in an interview that bore little resemblance to what was actually said and where terminology and tense were changed to appear to give a totally different view. The customer is then asked to sign it confirming that it is a true and accurate record. In all my years I have never known anybody actually read back 10 pages of handwritten statement before it was signed.

Presumably just the same as deprivation when you don't claim a benefit for which you are entitled - JSA/ESA as an example when claiming HB & CTS. I hear that if you don't turn up for the ESA test and are thrown off the benefit and don't want to claim JSA, the LA will treat you as though you are claiming JSA as you are entitled to it. What happens to payday loans - are these treated as income? I still don't see the logic in treating a loan, that is repayable, as income - presumably when it is repaid, the 'lost' benefit will be sent to the claimant? Can you get legal aid for this?

All I can say is what happened to me. I was asked how I got to the assessment - I told him that my wife drove the car, 'but didn't you drive it into the car park? - yes I parked it as she is completely hopeless unless she has a space 15' wide to get it in into. The guy also made a comment about how comfortable I looked whilst sat in the waiting room, and that I opened the door and held it open for the assessor to follow me in. On top of that he made reference to the way I was dressed - 'well kempt and clearly able to look after myself'. My wife was very surprised with what happened and what was said as she waited for me patiently in the waiting room (no one pointed out that she could have come in with me!)

I do have a modicum of intelligence, but since when does a loan received equate to income? I can understand the DWP/LA treating it as capital - but why income? Is that the same for all loans? This is making me think twice about lending my daughter a large capital sum (£155,000) for her to use to purchase the flat she lives in. The loan, like a Student Loan is repayable. She is in receipt of IS and DLA (Middle Care & High Mobility) for her 6 year old son as well as a substantial (£250 a week) payment from the child's father which is not treated as her income. If I make the loan I don't expect the DWP/LA to cancel her means tested benefits.