The UK’s legal system could become an unexpected casualty of the proposed benefit changes, with Liz Kendall’s welfare reform plans causing concern among benefit claimants and applicants worried about the impact on their finances.
Daniel McAfee, Head of Legal Operations at Lawhive and a UK lawyer, has pointed out that the stricter criteria for Personal Independence Payments will be at the forefront of this “legal battleground”, questioning the legality of the reforms themselves.
McAfee has offered advice to those who will bear the brunt of these changes: “When the time comes, any individuals looking to make a claim in light of the DWP changes should keep meticulous records of all communications, assessments, and financial impacts.
“The key here is to be proactive and challenge any inconsistencies or unfair treatment from the outset.”
He explained that with the new restricted eligibility requirements for PIP: “There could be grounds for challenge if it can be proved that the new criteria fail to adequately reflect the complex and fluctuating nature of many disabilities, especially mental health conditions. Think about the challenges in quantifying mental health.”
McAfee added: “How do you objectively measure ‘anxiety’ or ‘depression’ in a way that aligns with rigid criteria? That’s where the legal battleground will be.”
According to the expert, the Equality Act 2010 will be crucial in this scenario, as it prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities.
The welfare reform is currently in the Green Paper stage, open to debate and discussion, with no concrete laws in place yet. However, Daniel emphasized that the DWP must provide significant clarification before the changes can be considered legally sound.
He stated: “This is where the ‘can versus can’t work’ rhetoric falls apart. The legal protections here hinge on the government’s duty of care and its obligations under the Equality Act and human rights law.
“There needs to be clear exemptions and protections for those with the most severe disabilities. Any benefit reductions must be proportionate and justified. Otherwise, it could be argued that any reduction that results in a failure to meet basic needs is unlawful.”
Kendall’s proposed changes aim to encourage people claiming disability benefits to return to work.
However, the lawyer urged these individuals to be aware of their rights regarding workplace accommodations and discrimination, as this could become a harsh reality for many.
Daniel said: “Some may encounter workplace accommodation issues, potentially leading to disability discrimination concerns and reasonable adjustment disputes. Others may face in-work benefit complications, creating demand for employment law guidance alongside benefits advice.
“Local authorities will likely see increased applications for discretionary support as individuals attempt to close financial gaps. This could prompt legal questions around the scope of local authority obligations and appeal rights regarding discretionary decisions.”
Summarising the broader concerns, Daniel remarked that such shifts are “notoriously messy” when it comes to legal problems. He cautioned that before rolling out any new policies, it’s crucial for the Government to focus on ensuring clarity of information, minimise disruption to current claims, and streamline the appeals process.
