Disabled man dies in poverty and squalor after DWP removes his benefits, just as Labour cuts PIP by £4.5bn

The body of a disabled man was found in his flat in distressing, squalid conditions, just weeks after the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) wrongly removed his disability benefits because he had failed to return a claim form.

His sister, his only surviving close relative, believes he may have been left without enough credit on his phone to call for help, while he had not had enough money to fix his broken mobility scooter.

David* (pictured), who was 59, had run out of pads for his incontinence, so his flat in Salisbury was covered in blood and faeces when his body was discovered by the emergency services, after his sister Susan* had grown increasingly concerned at his failure to answer her messages.

Susan believes the wrongful removal of his personal independence payment (PIP) played a significant part in his death.

She told Disability News Service (DNS): “He was already on the breadline, so I think it would have been devastating for him.”

She also believes DWP failed to make the necessary safeguarding checks before removing his PIP.

She has now warned that the death of her much-loved brother must act as a warning of the horrors to come if the government goes ahead with its planned £4.5 billion cuts to PIP.

David, who lived on the ground floor of a two-storey council house, had left a handwritten note describing his deteriorating health and state of desperation, and how he had fallen over eight times since the start of the year.

He is believed to have died on 19 February, after 25 years of ill-health which had grown considerably worse over the last year.

David had ME, fibromyalgia and diverticulitis, which left him with severe fatigue, “mental fog”, reoccurring flu and incontinence, and only able to walk a few steps.

The handwritten note described his continual incontinence and how he was losing a cup of blood a day because of the diverticulitis.

But his PIP had been removed just weeks earlier, on 4 January, after he failed to return the lengthy form that he needed to fill out as part of a review of his claim ordered by DWP.

His sister says he would not have been well enough to walk to the post-box to post it, even if he had been able to fill it in, because he could “barely make it to his gate without falling over”.

Although DWP later wrote to him to say his PIP would be reinstated on 20 February, the notification of this decision did not arrive until two weeks after his death, and his family believe the decision was only made after the department were told of his death on 21 February.

Because he had been recovering from an eye infection, Susan believes he may not have realised his PIP had been removed until shortly before his death, as he had not mentioned it in any of his text messages in January or during their last conversation on 1 February.

She said: “It was an absolutely brutal thing to do to a vulnerable person, and I can only imagine the psychological distress that he must have felt when he actually did read the letter.”

By the time he read it, she believes, he was too ill to act and may not have been able to call for help because his phone had run out of credit.

His death has disturbing echoes of other deaths linked to DWP over the last decade – including those of Philippa Day, Jodey Whiting and Errol Graham** – and offers yet more evidence that the department is not fit for purpose.

It will also add to calls for a public inquiry into the years of deaths and other harm caused by DWP.

DWP has so far refused to comment, or answer questions about his death.

Susan, who lives in another part of the country but kept in regular contact with her brother, said this week that his death was an example of the “immense distress” and deaths that will result from Labour’s plans to cut more than £4.5 billion from PIP, which “verge on the point of barbaric”.

Susan believes David would not have been able to cope with the 24-page form, which she believes arrived without a self-addressed envelope to return the completed form to DWP.

She knew he had been short of money even before his PIP was removed – she and her partner sent him money for a new mattress at Christmas because the old one was filthy, following months of persistent diarrhoea – and Susan believes that losing his PIP plunged him into destitution.

In an email to his sister last summer, he told her: “I get PIP, it is to give disabled people extra money to pay for a cleaner, or the cost of taxis because they are too sick to drive etc.

“I get the lowest amount possible when I am entitled to the full amount possible.

“The bloody gov is being so unfair and cruel to the disabled. I got an application form to fill in to show them the reality of my life.

“Like some bad days when I can’t even get to the kitchen to make a cup of tea.

“I simply now did not have the energy to appeal and go to a tribunal in person where three doctors question you.”

She became increasingly alarmed about her brother during February when he failed to reply to text messages and emails.

She said: “For the last few years, it can be a week, sometimes two weeks, before he replies to me, although I always become very anxious, but he does get back to me eventually.

“But this time he hadn’t got back to me several times and then when I phoned him, his phone was dead – whether that was because the phone was not charged or because he ran out of money to top it up, I don’t know.”

She added: “I believe that the reduction in his PIP directly contributed to his inability to maintain his essential mobility aid and, most tragically, to access essential communication.

“This tragic sequence of events suggests a systemic failure in the support provided to vulnerable individuals.

“My brother’s death is not just a personal tragedy; it raises serious questions about the inadequacy and lack of humanity in the current social security system, as well as within local support systems in Salisbury.”

And she said his death should act as a warning call to the government not to plough ahead with its £4.5 billion in cuts to PIP.

She said: “My concern is how many people will be affected by cuts if people are already on the breadline and already struggling, like my brother, and already feeling suicidal.

“To have what little they have taken from them, I think it would cause widespread deaths.”

Susan originally raised her concerns about her brother with members of the Disability Benefits Consortium, including Caroline Collier, from Inclusion Barnet, who passed the email – with Susan’s permission – to DNS.

Collier, speaking on behalf of Inclusion Barnet’s Campaign for Disability Justice, said: “Susan’s initial email was heartbreaking, and I’m so pleased she felt able to speak to DNS so that David’s story can be told.

“I can hardly begin to imagine the difficulty and desperation of David’s final weeks, and believe that we have a duty to reflect as a society as to why we allow such tragedies to keep happening.

“Firstly, I think it’s important that there is an inquest, so that the role of the DWP and other agencies in this case can be properly scrutinised.

“Secondly, we need to urgently reframe the conversation around the current proposed cuts to recognise that, far from the narratives peddled by certain sections of the press, there are two million disabled people in the UK who are destitute, many of whom will be facing similar challenges to David.

“This has to be addressed: literally the last thing we need is more cuts.

“At the Campaign for Disability Justice, we want the government to commit to working towards a decent life for all, and to ending these appalling outcomes for disabled people.”

DNS asked DWP on Tuesday morning to answer a series of questions about David’s death but it had not responded by noon today (Thursday), other than to finally acknowledge the request last night.

DNS had asked if the department would be apologising to Susan; if it would be investigating the circumstances of David’s death; whether David had been flagged on DWP’s systems as a “vulnerable” claimant; if DWP accepted there had been a critical safeguarding failure when it appeared to have removed David’s PIP without checking he could survive without it; whether DWP only reinstated his PIP after learning of his death; and whether it would now put reforms and cuts to PIP on hold until his death has been investigated.

*Not their real names

**All three feature in The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, which is published by Pluto Press

A note from the editor:

Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations.

Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009.

Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…