What is really going on in politics? Get our daily email briefing straight to your inbox Sign up Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

In May I wrote about the ­distressing case of two men – one dying and one disabled – fighting Esther McVey in the high court over cuts to their support due to Universal Credit.

This fight gave the lie to McVey’s often repeated claims that “anyone who is moved to universal credit without a change of circumstance will not lose out in cash terms”.

Before they were changed to UC, the men received Severe Disability Premium and Enhanced Disability Premium – benefits specifically designed to support around 500,000 severely disabled people in the UK who live alone without carers.

Under UC, they were losing £178 of support every month.

Though the men can’t be named for legal reasons, their testimonies make for harrowing reading.

(Image: Getty)

“TP” is a dying cancer patient who was left living in squalor during chemotherapy after moving to a Universal Credit area to receive treatment on his doctor’s advice.

Meanwhile “AR”, who has severe mental health problems, was left starving and suicidal after being forced to move to a UC area by the bedroom tax.

In June, Mr Justice Lewis ruled that Work and Pensions Secretary McVey had unlawfully discriminated against the men. Yet, this week, both men were back in court seeking compensation from the DWP.

Even worse, when McVey’s department finally agreed to pay them, the Secretary of State’s lawyers tried to keep the sum a secret. Mr Justice Lewis was having none of it. “You are the government and we should know what you are doing and what public money you are spending,” he told the DWP.

He even told the court: “The government is trying to hide something... they lost and they do not want to admit they lost.”

Finally, the two men have been properly compensated, but not without detailing their further distress. AR is now in a manic episode with hallucinations only controlled by medication. He described to the court how he had been living on one meal a day, supplemented by Jaffa Cakes, which he buys for £4 for 100.

He spent the bitter winter with holes in his shoes and has lost two stone.

Meanwhile, in the last months of his life, TP has been unable to travel to spend time with his elderly parents because the DWP has left him destitute. He was also forced to reveal humiliating details of the squalid state of his flat and the embarrassment he feels because he can’t afford to buy the new clothes he needs because his medication has led to him putting on weight.

As if all of that wasn’t enough, it seems that McVey is up to her old tricks again. Yesterday, the DWP confirmed to me that the Secretary of State will appeal the judicial review that found in the men’s favour. A DWP spokesman added that “in the interim we have agreed to make payments to the lead claimants”.

Meanwhile, in June, McVey announced that “we are changing the system” so that claimants on the Severe Disability Premium “will not be moved to Universal Credit until they qualify for transitional protection” and promised to recompense those who had already been moved on to UC. This seemed good news. Yet the draft regulations submitted by her department to the Social Security Advisory Committee are only proposing to pay those already in UC areas £80 a month. AR and TP were losing around £180 a month. That’s a £100 shortfall.

Thousands of UC claimants will be affected by this pathetic refusal to just pay up and let people get on with living their lives, or dying in peace.

Tessa Gregory, from law firm Leigh Day, who represented the two men, says her clients “call upon the Secretary of State to urgently reconsider” transitional protections.

TP says he is “delighted” with the result but says the government must now “deal further with the obvious significant flaws in the roll-out of the Universal Credit system for disabled people to ensure that it is indeed fit

for purpose and that a true safety

net exists”.

This week, MPs heard that the UC system is “handing power to domestic abusers” by making a single household payment.

The long waits for help under UC continue to drive impoverished families below the breadline.

Meanwhile, there are multiple other groups suffering because of this deeply flawed benefit.

Among them, in a bizarre postcode lottery, thousands of severely disabled people who have had the misfortune to live in areas where UC is already rolled out.