**Concerns Rise Over Looming PIP Payment Cuts as Experts Outline Who May Be Spared**
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is preparing to implement new eligibility criteria for Personal Independence Payment (PIP), with significant changes expected to take effect from November 2026. According to welfare experts and former assessors, these amendments could see an estimated 400,000 people across the UK lose their entitlement to this crucial benefit, sparking concern among disability advocates and campaigners.
PIP provides financial assistance for individuals aged 16 to 64 who face daily living or mobility difficulties due to a longstanding illness or disability. Presently, claimants undergo an assessment that considers their ability to complete a range of daily tasks. These include managing medications, cooking, dressing, and moving around safely. Payments are currently awarded based on a points system, allowing people to qualify through a combination of low scores across multiple activities.
However, under the forthcoming rules, claimants will need to score at least four points in one single activity and accrue a minimum of eight points overall to qualify for the lower rate. Those aiming for the higher rate must achieve twelve points. This represents a notable shift in how entitlement is determined, making the process potentially more restrictive for some applicants.
James Merrell, who previously worked as a PIP assessor, has shared insights into which applicants might be less likely to face payment reductions under the new regime. According to Merrell, the changes are more likely to spare claimants with “advanced Multiple Sclerosis (MS), motor neurone disease, late-stage cancer, or severe physical disabilities.” He explained that these conditions are not only medically clear but also often require visible and ongoing support, characteristics that fit well with the new, stricter criteria being introduced by the DWP.
“Based on current information, those with clear, medically documented impairments affecting mobility or personal care—such as advanced MS, motor neurone disease, late-stage cancer, or severe disabilities—are likely to retain their awards,” Merrell said. These observations were echoed in a recent report by Yorkshire Live, highlighting the growing expectation that eligibility will align more closely with obviously identifiable and long-term disabilities.
Whilst these developments may protect people with certain severe conditions, there is deepening concern among disability rights campaigners about the fate of those whose disabilities may not be as readily apparent. Historically, PIP assessments were intended to focus not solely on diagnoses, but on how a person’s daily life is impacted by their condition. Critics argue that moving away from this model risks discriminating against those with less visible or fluctuating conditions.
A spokesperson for CWS Limited, a company specialising in PIP claims support, voiced particular worry about groups that may be overlooked. “The proposed changes, if they take a more medical-model approach, could leave behind individuals with fluctuating, invisible, or mental health conditions,” they warned. This group includes people living with chronic fatigue syndromes, autism, ADHD, fibromyalgia, long COVID, and a host of other disorders that are challenging to quantify with medical tests alone.
Experts are also warning of the broader implications of such a change. They caution that rigid eligibility criteria grounded largely in visible medical evidence could exclude those with intermittent or mental health-related challenges, even when these conditions significantly impede daily living. Campaigners fear that the new requirements may force more people to undergo lengthy appeals or, worse, deter vulnerable claimants from seeking support altogether.
As the DWP moves forward in finalising the revised PIP regulations, stakeholders are urging the government to carefully consider the implications for those with less easily defined needs. Maintaining the balance between preventing fraud and supporting those genuinely in need remains a pressing concern for policymakers.
With November 2026 still over a year away, disability organisations, welfare advisors, and the public alike await further clarification on how these changes will be implemented. For now, the debate highlights the difficulty of crafting benefits policies that are effective, fair, and sufficiently responsive to the complex realities facing people with disabilities in the UK today.