warm places for the elderly to go to because they are not getting the winter fuel payment

My father is 92 lives in a 3 bedroom semi detached house - has enough money to heat the heat 24/7 at sweltering levels and refuses to put the heating on at an adequate temperature for more than a couple of hours a day- MADNESS- he won’t be told- when we go to visit we layer up!!!

It's moving around, isn't it.

I can't move around like I used to. However, yesterday I was doing housework, the CH was on and I felt much too warm. DH was sitting filling in forms and said the temperature was just right.

I really don’t think that well off politicians or even some well off GNers realise how poorer elderly people worry about heating bills Allira.Ones who don’t quite fit the criteria for pension credit or anything else, and can’t move around sufficiently to keep themselves warm enough.

I was incensed with this, I don’t qualify for it as not a pensioner but Mum was very upset.I worked lots of extra shifts to give her the money as I knew she wouldn’t be keeping herself warm enough.

Well done Oreo

We used to worry about MIL years ago, then a Labour government too; her house was usually freezing and we did give her money towards her gas bill although we were hard pushed to do that.
She always voted Tory as she didn't trust Labour because she said their motto was "Do as I say and not as I do".

I don't think any of them did her any real favours actually.

I was keen to get rid of the Tories, enough's enough.

But I did expect Labour to be more compassionate and thoughtful.
Sadly disappointed so far.
Perhaps I should have known better at my age.

Allira

Well, I'm sorry, but posters should be allowed to voice their concerns about something a government may do without being accused of using it as a convenient stick with which to beat the government, and nothing is going to wrench that stick from the hands of those who don't like them

It puts posters into a slot where they may not necessarily belong.

It certainly does!
I also voted for Labour, had been waiting a long time for it and what do we get? Six months of dire decisions that’s what!
Starting with the withdrawal of the WFA a jaw dropping decision with Winter on the horizon and not even being means tested properly, I was incensed with this, I don’t qualify for it as not a pensioner but Mum was very upset.I worked lots of extra shifts to give her the money as I knew she wouldn’t be keeping herself warm enough.
It is not a case of a convenient stick at all, it’s a very inconvenient stick🤬

That was what the government said they wanted to happen- a shift from the allowance going to the better-off to those with less money. It appears they have succeeded in that. Now let’s hope they get the messaging right and can get it in the media (difficult, I know).

Since 1 April 2024, DWP has:

received 215,200 Pension Credit claims
cleared 161,800 Pension Credit claims
of which, 81,000 Pension Credit claims have been awarded (81,500 claims have not been awarded)
there has been a 145% increase in Pension Credit claims received by DWP in the past 16 weeks compared to the 16 weeks before the Chancellors Winter Fuel Payment announcement.

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/pension-credit-applications-and-awards-november-2024/pension-credit-applications-and-awards-november-2024--2

That would probably be costly to administer though.

I would like to see fuel bills capped by limiting the profits to shareholders. British Gas used to belong to the public (aka the taxpayers), until Thatcher sold it off. Some of the people with shares that make money from people’s high bills would until now have been given taxpayers’ money towards their own fuel bills to augment their profits. Is that defensible? Anyone?

How about a sliding scale on the fuel payment?

A bit like the bedroom tax, and that wasn't exactly welcomed.

The sensible thing would have been to continue to pay WFP universally and claw it back through taxation.

That would have been far more sensible than having such a definite cut-off point.

I just think it was hasty and ill-thought out.

I could reflect back some of the "advice" that's been given to me, (I'm a real life feckless single parent with no savings) but it wouldn't be well received, I fear.

If anyone else has a solution, please suggest it? The same would apply wherever the threshold is set, so raising it wouldn't make much difference.

The sensible thing would have been to continue to pay WFP universally and claw it back through taxation.

There are around 13 million pensioners. WFP is paid to around 8 million households. There are around 4 million pensioners living alone receiving either £200 or £300 so another 4 million households where the payment is divided between the pensioner occupants.

On average, single pensioners tend to have lower incomes than couples (and single female pensioners have lower incomes than single male pensioners) - so there is probably a good correlation between living alone and being in fuel poverty.

Some 9 million pensioners pay tax. (Around 2.7 million pay or are expected to be paying at 40% by 2027 and 500,000 at 45%.)

For most it could be clawed back through the tax code on occupational pensions, Any other adjustments can be made by assessment.

The Goverment estimated they would save 1.4 billion by restricting the payment to people receiving Pension Credit. Universal WFP cost 2 billion a year. Taxing it would probably claw back around the same amount the Government aim to save. Hard to say without knowing whether all pensioners in one household are taxpayers.

Those on full nSP who have no other income, who are among the most aggrieved by the unfairness of the change, are outside the tax net and should remain so for two more years if the triple lock remains around 4%.

Hopefully the chancellor will start to see sense and reinstate Rooker Wise (which Sunak suspended) so that tax personal allowances can start to rise again to keep those whose only income is (or equivalent to) the single tier State Pension (without any protected payments) out of the tax net.

Doodledog

Ok. Here is a thread from 2017, when the Tories were proposing scrapping the WFA. Can anyone spot a rather different vibe?

www.gransnet.com/forums/legal_and_money/1237007-Loosing-winter-fuel-allowance

I wonder if the Labour party read that thread and were influenced by it when considering whether to change the WFP entitlement? Perhaps GN is read in powerful circles!

CanadianGran

Allira, oops, my error.
It seems our electricity costs are about the same, but your gas is much higher.

Since electricity is cheaper, can people use electric space heaters and heat by room?

It seems our electricity costs are about the same

Oh, that's a pity, I had my bags packed ready to fly over to Canada 😁
We have some long-lost cousins over there somewhere.

Allira, oops, my error.
It seems our electricity costs are about the same, but your gas is much higher.

Since electricity is cheaper, can people use electric space heaters and heat by room?

Allira

sluttygran

I wonder how many elderly folk might need help to claim benefits which they may not be aware that they are entitled to?
Apparently there is a low uptake of Pension Credits, and Attendance Allowance which many would be eligible for. Attendance Allowance is not means-tested.

My DN suggested we should apply for AA but we don't feel we qualify. She said the form was about 40 pages long as she helped her mother apply.

I don't know about AA, and haven't seen the Pension Credit form, but it has been well publicised that whilst the form is long, a lot of the space is taken up with 'go to question 10 (or whatever) if your answer to question 2 is 'no', and so on. Nobody will need to fill it all in, and people can get help from Age UK if they need it.

You can check eligibility in advance using this form.

Of course there will be those who don't qualify as they have a pension that takes them over the threshold. That is always a problem with means-tests, as there is a balancing act between ensuring that people don't do without and that people are not deterred from making provision where they can. It may have been better to sort that out before announcing the cuts, but it is a difficult conundrum.

I feel for those who are above the limit because they have tried to improve their lives, and no government will want to discourage people from doing so and claiming benefits instead. It is very unfair on those who miss out, but the only alternative is to penalise those who haven't made provision, which would cause hardship. I don't know the answer. If anyone else has a solution, please suggest it? The same would apply wherever the threshold is set, so raising it wouldn't make much difference.

HousePlantQueen

Doodledog

You don't have to read far to see that when it was the Tories' proposition people felt very differently. There was even an article in The Times about how 'Pensioners Approved the Scrapping of the WFP', based on GN threads, but as I'm not a subscriber I couldn't open it.

That is the crux of what I'm saying. I fully understand that people have different perspectives, but it has felt clear to me from the start that a lot of the complaints are politically motivated, and that protestations of balance and objectivity don't hold water. Obviously many of the personnel on the old thread are no longer members, and many current GNs weren't posting then, which is why I felt it was ok to post it. I'm not pointing fingers, but showing how the zeitgeist has shifted along with the shift in government.

It was an interesting read indeed.

Good post Doodledog.. an interesting perspective

I've skim read it now and agree with you. A very different vibe but also very different times. A lot has happened since 2016 and the referendum.

The most astute post on there comes from someone who said wtte the effect that people view things differently when done (or not done) by the Tories as opposed to done (or not done) by Labour.

This was the Institute for Public Policy Research in 2009.

As a fuel poverty measure, WFPs are very poorly targeted with just 12 per cent of recipients thought to be fuel-poor ... Although they may benefit some, it is clear that WFPs represent significant and poorly targeted expenditure, and are therefore in need of reform in the current context.

14 years of Tory government including the Coalition and they did nothing about it? Why?

I don't agree with how it's been done but it's been coming for years.

Doodledog

You don't have to read far to see that when it was the Tories' proposition people felt very differently. There was even an article in The Times about how 'Pensioners Approved the Scrapping of the WFP', based on GN threads, but as I'm not a subscriber I couldn't open it.

That is the crux of what I'm saying. I fully understand that people have different perspectives, but it has felt clear to me from the start that a lot of the complaints are politically motivated, and that protestations of balance and objectivity don't hold water. Obviously many of the personnel on the old thread are no longer members, and many current GNs weren't posting then, which is why I felt it was ok to post it. I'm not pointing fingers, but showing how the zeitgeist has shifted along with the shift in government.

It was an interesting read indeed.

It is well worth claiming, as it opens the door to other benefits.
I think I read (on here) that people are beginning to apply, now, though.

I've also read (on here) the attitude that why should someone have to claim it.

So again, people can't have it all their own way.
If you genuinely can't manage, and are endangering yourself, then claim!!

sluttygran

I wonder how many elderly folk might need help to claim benefits which they may not be aware that they are entitled to?
Apparently there is a low uptake of Pension Credits, and Attendance Allowance which many would be eligible for. Attendance Allowance is not means-tested.

My DN suggested we should apply for AA but we don't feel we qualify. She said the form was about 40 pages long as she helped her mother apply.

I wonder how many elderly folk might need help to claim benefits which they may not be aware that they are entitled to?
Apparently there is a low uptake of Pension Credits, and Attendance Allowance which many would be eligible for. Attendance Allowance is not means-tested.

I agree with all of that. It doesn't contradict what I said earlier, though.

From my own point of view, I was surprised that the Labour Government (which I voted for) decided to do this so quickly after election on the pretext of helping to fill the black hole.

Not every pensioner needs the WFA but it has left many older people worried about how to keep warm and frightened to put on the heat.
It also antagonised the Trade Unions.

It was contentious, hasty and not one of their better ideas either.