The DWP has launched an entirely bogus consultation on changes to personal independence payment (PIP) and universal credit (UC) by refusing to consult on almost everything that matters most to claimants.

The Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working Green Paper sets out proposed changes to PIP, including preventing anyone who does not score at least one 4 point or more descriptor from being eligible for the daily living component.

It also proposes to freeze the LCWRA (health) element of UC and abolish the WCA.

Non-consultation

Yet the list of things that the DWP is refusing to consult on, meaning there are no questions about them in the online consultation, includes:

  • Scrapping the WCA
  • Creating a single assessment for PIP and the UC health element
  • Freezing the health element of UC until 2029/30
  • Only awarding PIP daily living if you get at least one descriptor scoring 4 or more points
  • Restarting WCA reassessments until the WCA is scrapped

(You can find a full list of the issues the DWP will and won’t be consulting on at Annex A of the Green Paper).

Leading questions

Instead of asking for feedback on these vital issues, the consultation asks questions that make the assumption that participants accept that people should lose their PIP:

2. What support do you think we could provide for those who will lose their Personal Independence Payment entitlement as a result of a new additional requirement to score at least 4 points on one daily living activity?

3. How could we improve the experience of the health and care system for people who are claiming Personal Independence Payment who would lose entitlement?

Missing information

Vital information that would allow people to have an informed opinion even on questions like those above has been deliberately withheld from the Green Paper.

For example, the DWP knows precisely, or could make a very accurate estimate of, how many current claimants would lose their award on review if their condition remains unchanged and the new system is introduced.

It also knows what condition those claimants have: how many have physical conditions like arthritis, mental health conditions like anxiety and depression, neurodevelopmental issues like ASD or ADHD.

The DWP knows, but it’s not telling us.

Yet how can you properly answer questions like the ones above if you don’t know who is most likely to be affected?   

Benefits and Work has made a Freedom of Information request for these figures, but we suspect they will not be forthcoming.

The information may be included in the impact assessment due to be published on 26th March.

Otherwise, perhaps readers could ask their MPs or a friendly member of the House of Lords to ask for them?

Judicial review

In January of this year, the High Court found that a Conservative consultation on changes to the work capability assessment (WCA) was unlawful, meaning that the changes could not go ahead.

The judge held that the DWP had: failed to adequately explain the proposals; had failed to explain that the main purpose was to save money rather than to get claimants into work; had failed to provide sufficient time for the consultation.

At the time, many of us thought that this meant that the DWP under Labour would have to carry out an honest consultation on changes to PIP and UC.

Instead, the lesson that the DWP has learnt is not that it should be honest, but instead that it should just not consult on anything meaningful at all.

According to the House of Commons Library:

“In some cases, public bodies have a legal duty to carry out a consultation. There will be legal duty to consult where:

  • there is legislation which requires a consultation
  • a government department or public body has promised to consult
  • there is an established practice of consultation in similar cases
  • not consulting would lead to obvious unfairness (in exceptional cases)”

We would argue that there is a very definite ”established practice of consultation” in relation to major changes to disability and incapacity benefits and that the current exercise is an attempt to pass off a fake consultation as the real thing.

It was the Public Law Project which won the case against the DWP over the WCA consultation.  We very much hope that they will be able launch a similar judicial review over this Green Paper consultation.

Alternative consultation

In the meantime, we hope that a major charity or umbrella body with good standing amongst the public and MPs, such as the Disability Benefits Consortium, will launch an alternative consultation.

It doesn’t need to be long or complicated.  It just needs to ask the questions that the DWP is scared to ask, such as:

Do you agree that only people who score at least 4 points on one daily living activity should get an award of the PIP daily living component?

Do you agree that the WCA should be abolished and replaced with a single assessment for both PIP and the UC health element?

Whatever the results, they could be circulated to MPs and members of the House of Lords who wish to be properly informed before they vote on these issues.

However, time is very short.  The official consultation does not end until 30 June.  But because the DWP have chosen not to consult on major changes, such as the new PIP scoring system, they can introduce new legislation as soon as they wish.  They have stated that they intend to bring forward legislation in this session of parliament, which ends on 21 July, so it could be as early as May that we see the new provisions. 

This means that, even though the change to PIP scoring will not be put into effect until November 2026, the law enabling it could be firmly in place very much sooner.

Silencing voices

The Green paper consultation is so dishonest that we feel unable to recommend that people take part in the way we normally would, though we also know that the DWP may argue that lack of response means that most people do not object to the changes.

In the Green paper, the DWP claim that “We are committed to putting the views and voices of disabled people and people with health conditions at the heart of everything we do.”

In fact, this bogus consultation is entirely about silencing the voices of disabled people and people with health conditions.

The reality is that the DWP under Labour is proving to be even more dishonest and devious than it was under the Tories.

The Green Paper consultation is online here or you can read all the questions in the consultation here.

 You can try the proposed new PIP test here.

You can also:

keep up with what’s changing and when

find out what you can do if you are unhappy about Labour’s plans

follow the latest news about PIP and UC changes.

 

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    Dear Keir,
    Could you give me the precise percentage of disabled staff you employ? Full time with reasonable adjustments, work aids support etc required? Because I’m struggling to notice them in your government party…
    Unkind regards….
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    i've only just had my pip renewed just before xmas. it took 8 months after completing the renewal form just to get a decision and even though i did eventually get it in the meantime it caused me so much stress my panic attacks got far worse, i could never sleep and i got a stomach ulcer due to all the worrying, also my blood pressure was so through the roof i got blurred vision so bad i couldn't see for most of the day,. i have anxiety & depression, im agoraphobic and i have also been diagnosed with mixed personality disorder with emotionally unstable and paranoid personality disorders which means on a good day with all my medication working life is somewhat bearable. i haven't been outside my house in years and due to not being able to look after myself completely i need help with everyday activities such as cleaning etc  when i was awarded this time round i got the higher rate on both components just like i had before. but i never thought to question the scores on the page because i scored high enough for the higher rates on both and was happy it was just done and dusted with but this morning i saw you now need at least a 4 on the daily living part to keep getting that side of the pip but after checking i have all 1s and 2s on almost all daily living parts and i noticed i was only scored a 2 on "mixing with other people" for some reason even though i never go out to mix with anybody and last year the only person i spoke to in the whole year was my psychiatrist, i even spent christmas alone....after seeing this change i've been in a right state and im even thinking of finishing it as it's now getting to much for me to handle...i feel like i'm constantly on edge with the dwp and every time something gets sorted they bring out another rule change that just throws everything up in the air again. is it was them that pushed me into applying for pip in the first place even though i didn't really want to because i thought i wouldnt be accepted for it. they kept sending letters telling me to apply and saying it would make things easier for me and ultimately it did and it really has helped but now they have decided im not entitled to it ...just recently they have also decided i need to be on U.C now where they told me the migration may take 6 weeks to sort out so now no payments and this pip thing hanging over me is driving crazy...once again.. just as things start to settle down they change up and i'm now back to my lowest point again constantly worrying
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 days ago
      @andy When does your current PIP run out?  These changes won't apply to you until after November 2026. If you remain in your current condition, as you say agoraphobic and can't engage socially with anyone, you should get full points for that descriptor. This is the problem with the whole benefits system, you have to watch every single thing they do. If it is as you say, there is no way you should have only gotten two points for the "mixing with other people" descriptor. Next time your PIP runs out, you should challenge the points awarded and if they refuse to  listen, take it as far as tribunal. A lot of appeals pass at tribunal.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    Neil Findlay MSP has resigned from Scottish Labour. His resignation letter is excoriating towards Starmer. Labour will get hammered in Scotland next year.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Jonno Lets hope Labour MPs in parliament oppose this government which is anything but labour!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Jonno I've been thinking about sending a letter to my local MP, to guarantee him, he has my vote as independent, if he would be kicked out of the party!   His office is known for supporting local people.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    I have a question about lcwra, from what I know I was due a review around August last year, I understand there is a backlog, however if I am asked for a review at some point this year will the new rules be in place and I’d have lcwra taken off of me? I don’t get pip, the work capability assessment caused me so much stress I just can’t face going through something like that again, even though im apparently entitled to it.
    This is all so scary! 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 13 days ago
      @Lisa
      "if I am asked for a review at some point this year will the new rules be in place and I’d have lcwra taken off of me?"

      I'm reasonably sure the answer to that question is no. They are ramping up WCA reassessments from now until 2028, when the WCA is scrapped. Unless I've completely misread this, that means the health element depending on a PIP-type assessment will not come in until 2028. So if you have to go through another WCA between now and then, it should be under the same rules that apply now.

      I think this is why they're ramping up WCA reassessments between now and 2028. I think they're hoping that they can use these reassessments to deny LCWRA to as many people as possible before the new system comes into force. Why else would they ramp up reassessments using an assessment which they're saying is so flawed it needs to be scrapped? That said, if you have medical evidence to substantiate the fact that you still qualify for LCWRA under the current rules, then hopefully any reassessment would be OK. If not, that evidence should still stand you in good stead at an appeal tribunal, since tribunals tend to give medical evidence its due weight. That can never be guaranteed of course, I've occasionally read horror stories about tribunals, but I've read far more about assessments. Tribunals are, by and large, more willing to listen.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 days ago
      @Carbow32 Why? Is there a deadline to meet now?
      Thanks
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 days ago
      @Scorpion Same with me too. I got ESA support group, but the process put me off so much, Ive been kind of working up to applying for PIP for over one year now.......
      Is there a benefit of putting in a claim now, asap? Why? Thanks.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 days ago
      @Carbow32 I tried to but never heard back either way, I called 5 or 6 times and was just on hold for anything up to an hour each time rang off because I was getting extremely angry over it and it's not fair on the call centre staff to be greeted by my seriously pissed off self as I would inevitably have been 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Lisa Same, the WCA caused me immense stress, starting from the day I unexpectantly received the ESA50 form, that I haven't bothered applying for PIP. Stress degrades people's health both physically and mentally.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    Its a blanket attack on the most vulnerable people.
    The very sickest people, with very severe incurable illness and disease who have already been found by specialists, to be sick enough to be incapable of working again and have been entered into the support groups.
    This would no longer matter under the new proposals.
    They are proposing to remove the WCA and replace it with the PIP assessment.
    Instead, you have to score 4 points for the daily living components of PIP.
    There are many people with very severe illness, who have been found to be incapable of working, by specialists, who may only qualify for 2 points of a PIP descriptor instead of 4 points.
    I.E. You have to have supervision to 'prepare a meal'
    So in the real world what happens is a PIP assessor asks a guy dying of cancer, can you use a microwave?
    The guy doesnt think, and just says yes i can push a button.
    Right youre fit for work sunshine.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago

    Correction to last post please read  …
    Ignore any figures to let’s see the impact statements as to which group the cuts will fall upon asap 

    I personally Estimate the cuts will be extremely high amongst the older claimants currently on PIP opposed to younger claimants as i said i stand to be corrected on this we need transparency? Honesty ?

    I can agree with that sentiment where folk are fit enough to do so have no issue with it
    But the real steel here will come from 
    Old on the back of the headline as to why they see this as moral
    When in fact it’s not the truth at all
    I doubt many young folk trying to claim PIP have
    Close
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    Just sent my email letter to my local LABOUR MP.. Alison McGovern 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 days ago
      @Jonno Big mate of Liz Kendall apparently so go figure but at least I've tried
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Neil Cook Good luck with that Neil. She comes across as totally uncaring. But kudos for trying.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    It's clear that they have used a mathematical method to ensure that low rate PIP care element will be a thing of the past. They have a ideological view of what a disabled person is and it's clear it's very limited. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    Some of the folk in this discussion are old and have severe illness and or associated disability as result of this inc MS /heart /severe lung conditions and other similar diagnosis have voiced their fears not least my dear wife who has now lost half her lungs with a horrid progressive disease with no cure that’s recked her life at now aged 74
    Due to changes she will loose all of the living allowance when this gets through along with many thousands of others in similar categories Inc ones I mentioned and many others for the sake of not meeting a 4 point although meet high scores never the less 
    Makes no sense and nothing moral under sir kier starmer argument that can ever justify any of this behaviour 
    This appears as they did their home work prior studying all the point scoring that even those in highest groups with those needs physically which I suspect are the bulk of the cuts will end up loosing thousands with no support financially at all to fill any cut made but just gestures of waffle hoping it all goes away later 
    I have no doubt many young people claim this Benifit also and have no truck with with genuine claimants at all
    However the head line in all this is using the young to justify the the cuts to the old which they would never have used the latter as the headline as politically this would not have helped their moral so called argument and they well know this also the case 
    So in essence the bulk of these cuts will come from the old and needy not dismissing here young folk at all but I’m afraid this 5 billion will come from pip that older end of claimant’s
    With small percentage from the young 
    With no impact statement at this point I stand to be corrected on the numbers involved here but it’s going to be vast amongst the old I feel 
    The headline for all this is getting the young into work ?
    I can agree with that sentiment where folk are fit enough to do so have no issue with it 
    But the real steel here will come from 6/7000
    Old on the back of the headline as to why they see this as moral 
    When in fact it’s not the truth at all
    I doubt many young folk trying to claim PIP have 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    I have been trying to not only share this article but also explain on a couple social media platforms how this isn't a proper consultation and my comments are being removed which is very interesting 🤔 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    More info for ESA (CB)

    53. Unemployment insurance would be a new non-means tested entitlement for people who have contributed into the system. It would be created by replacing contribution-based Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) and Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) with a new single entitlement, paid at the current ESA rate (currently £138pw) and will be time-limited. This would provide stronger income 54. Alongside levelling up the rate, this change would end the indefinite entitlement to contributory

    ESA for those assessed as having limited capability for work-related activity (for new people claiming). Those unemployed after the time-limited period would be able to claim UC, depending on their personal circumstances. 

    ------------------------------

    I disagree with the above statement.

    I get a very small monthly amount from an 'income protection insurance policy', (I lost out on receiving the full amount, due to a client not paying me in my final 12 months working, and receiving a delayed diagnosis)

    I am only able to claim NS-ESA alongside my monthly income protection payment.
    Because NS-ESA is non means tested, contributory based.

    For any new applicants, who get any stipends from an 'income protection, or payment protection policy, they would not be able to claim UC, as UC is means tested....they would lose out and very probably end up claiming for more benefits than they would have done otherwise!!!

    All the big insurance companies, Aviva, Bupa, etc, have been selling working people, self employed, and employees, 'income protection insurance policies' for decades now, which pay out a certain percentage of your final 12 months earnings, if you contract a serious illness, and are unable to work.
    Usually 50% or less.

    These policies have been sold to millions of working people in the UK.

    None of these people would be able to claim the full amount of UC as well as receive their income protection policy. 

    I bet this aspect was not even taken under consideration by the DWP when they were preparing this paper. 

    Did they consult with the insurance companies? 



    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 days ago
      @Jonno Im going to write to the Lords, about it. 

      Up to five million people have taken out income protection policies over the last 30 years. 

      If those people only get £100 -£200 per week, (not enough to live on), they had the opportunity to apply for NS ESA as well.

      I get ESA and a small amount from my policy, and I am sure that I would have made a claim for other benefits, if I did not have my income protection policy.

      Those people will have their policies deducted pound for pound if they had to make a claim for UC instead of NS ESA.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Thatsnotmine. There appear to be so many mines within these proposals it is hard to keep up. Surely this Green Paper would be torn to shreds in the High Court?

      In my opinion the Government is chancing their arm here to see how much they can get away with.

      If the courts give them a bloody nose then they can always say that the judges are the enemies of the people  and the right-wing press such as the DM will back them up.

      Politics is all about the optics. Be seen to be tough, be seen to be taking the hard decisions when all it really is, is smoke and mirrors.

      Let's hope the High Court tears these "plans" to shreds.👍
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    But I thought keir starmers government  were in the courts 2 times with the same. Since then 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    I don't know much about how legal obligations regarding provision for and definition of disability works. But even so, it feels very fishy that Labour are suggesting that many, many disabled people with mobility difficulties now cannot assert that they also have significant needs around certain daily living and self-care tasks - tasks that may realistically be considered (demonstrated even) to be inextricably linked with their mobility limitations. The whole question of repeatedly, reliably, safely and in a timely manner is generally inseparable from the capacity to mobilise, surely? It's as though they're artificially separating a disabled person's capacity for daily living activities from their capacity to mobilise, as though the two aren't actually related. The image I have is of those children's books where you can turn half-pages to give them mismatched legs and bodies.

    This can't be logically or morally defensible, can it? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @pollenpath I'm not sure it's even legal.  By not allowing those with mobility issues access to UC higher level, surely that is discrimination against that group of ill and disabled people?  The Tory government lost a high court battle over cuts that would have affected those with mental health issues back in 2017.  I don't see how this is different.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @pollenpath Its not just mobility issues which I have I also have had 3 heart attacks, diabetic, and unable to walk due to a childhood accident and on loads of medications and yet just because I can use a microwave to prepare a unhealthy meal which would be bad for my diabetes and heart conditions I may lose the care element when I go into retirement next year and loose the pension credit and thereby rent housing allowance. I may have to end up living on the street.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    These cuts proposals were all drawn up by various rightwing think tanks! You can see where they originate from if you do a little research. For example, the policy about age-limiting and restricting. PIP is from a recent policy document by the Policy Exchange thinktank which was written with  involvement byLord” Blunkett.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 days ago
      @Anon2 He’s all for these cuts.Bit like Tony Blair.Hope the courts throw the lot out ,it’s blatant discrimination.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Doomed by DWP Lord Blunkett is a Labour peer and previous prominent labour MP. Doubt he's 'right-wing'
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Doomed by DWP That's irrelevant, Labour chose to make these cuts, they didn't have to but they are.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    Almost two years ago, I had to leave work and claim UC, after having suffered with bipolar type II and panic disorder my entire adult life. It was only two weeks ago that Citizens' Advice informed me that I should have been receiving PIP alongside the pittance I get from UC. 

    I really wish I could work. I have tried my hardest, but it always results in deteriorating mental health. I now have to live with parents in my thirties, I cannot afford to drive and have nothing to look forward to. Since claiming UC and being declared LCWRA, I have been hounded by the JobCentre, I have daily panic attacks, I feel to low to leave the house and my weight has dropped to less than 7 stone.

    The prospect of having PIP meant an opportunity to give me some independence and a way to improve my low quality of life. For the first time in years, I felt I had some hope. 

    That's gone now. I honestly feel that Labour have decided my life has no value and I am a burden on the taxpayer. I apologise for having to get this off my chest, but I fear that there is only one way this will end.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 days ago
      @Neil Cook ABSOLUTELY BLOODY DISGRACEFUL 

      Then I'm likely finished one way or the other , someone shoot me now and get it over with. Seriously not joking what's the ruddy point
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 days ago
      @Kate
      @Kate,

      1) The proposals have not been made law yet, and none will be for a while, if ever.
      2) You can still apply for pip under the current rules, so get help, darling, and start a claim asap. Knowing the proposals for new eligibility criteria will actually be an advantage as you will be able to lay a foundation for the future. You have already had contact with cab, so to go them again, they will understand how it all works/will work.
      3) If you are in lcwra group the job centre cannot 'hound' you. That is illegal. Again, get help, and stand up to them. Maybe a parent, or someone else, could go with you to cab?

      Best wishes and good luck xx
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Neil Cook From the Green Paper of yesterday, not any longer.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Neil Cook I was informed of this by Citizens Advice, but this was after going through the Work Health Programme and finding it so stressful that I sought advice. I hadn't realised it was optional - I told the Job Centre that I want to find work should my health improve and they signed me straight into it. They kept talking about sanctions and how they needed to get me in before spaces ran out so I was under the impression it was mandatory. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Kate If you have LCWRA shouldn't the DWP/jobcentre be obliged to leave you alone?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    I did do the consultation. However,( and as said in the report above, the questions are not good) where it says how should we help people who will be losing pip, I wrote that they shouldn't be losing it. 
    So maybe it may be worth putting forward that input 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Pj I put its barbaric
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Pj Yes! The questions are designed to intimidate people and throw them off the scent of objecting about these cuts. It is a ridiculous consultation and everyone should just write the same as you did. Don't anyone be intimidated by their game playing.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    I'm trying to figure out but cant really understand what would be the timeframe for them implementing this. It would have to pass Green paper then would presumably have to get passed by majority in commons and in lords? And then would they just cancel pip for claimants who don't have an individual 4 score, who then have to reapply, or call back for reassessment?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    Just putting this information on here for all from Scope. Please do reach out to them:

    "If you’re concerned about these changes, you can contact our friendly helpline team for advice. Call us on 0808 800 3333, or email helpline@scope.org.uk.

    Or contact one of the community team Community@scope.org.uk"

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    I would like to see the Equality Impact Assessment too, that’s not been published yet (another document which will be withheld no doubt until the last moment)…… so even if the consultation ‘was’ asking open questions, we’re being asked to comment without the data as well…..
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 days ago
    I looked at the Green Paper and it will obviously receive negative feedback but Starmer and co don't care, someone linked an article from the Express saying that the State Pension is a contributory benefit, NOT an entitlement and I believe just the mention of that means that Starmer are going to go after the State Pension. 

    I warned the Daily Mail crowd but they're blinded by their hated of disabled people on benefits.
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.