The Budget

NotTooOld, She hardly ever goes outside, so doesn't get cold feet. She wears furry slippers and can't walk more than about 3 or 4 metres anyway, because she has a replacement hip, which needs replacing, COPD and can't see where she's walking. Her wrists aren't strong enough to hold a rail.

I've told her she should appeal, but she can't bear the thought of going through another assessment and feeling that she wasn't believed.

Good to get your wise advise - I waffle on non-stop! Often not making too much sense!

That was to galen

Hugh Rossi the Tory MP retired in 1992, DLA started in 1992

daphnedill. I think these assessment panels take they view that a lot of people won't appeal. It's the same as suing a hospital: they hang on long enough in the hope the patient dies.

petra, What does this depressed person claim he can't do?

It's looking hopeful. I've been diagnosed as chronically depressed and been taking medication for most of the last 40 years. The JobCentre once told me that there was no point claiming ESA because I wouldn't get it, but I obviously didn't look scruffy enough. Thanks for the tip!

It was his idea. He came and lectured us on this marvellous new benefit.
Several of us pointed out our worries but just got brushed aside and ignored.

My mother probably will die soon.

petra the examination is undertaken by a 'health care professional' the decision is made a lay person in the DWP. The only panel is the Appeal tribunal and we are independent of the DWP. I'm employed by the MoJ

Yes, daphne, that's the problem, isn't it? Not being believed.
Obviously the government relies on that, even though there are many people who win appeals.

"It’s not true that we cannot afford these benefits for those who need them. The problem is that the resources required to meet those needs are sitting idle or underemployed. We know the private sector is not generating wealth. We know it is not investing. We know that we take five days to produce the output in the UK that the French make in four (let’s forget comparison with the Germans). We know that our emphasis on financial services, on saving, on accumulation of property wealth, on selling tax avoidance (what else is the 17% corporation tax rate about?) and keeping the City of London happy is hollowing out our economy for the benefit of just a few. But what we need to do is ensure that these absurd situations can be changed. "

That's the problem. No money in the system because those who have it hide it away. Why?

Zac Goldsmith has resigned from a disabled charity in Richmond, because he supported the cuts, so was asked to resign.

Can I just chip in here about the aids and appliances? I posted about this on another thread.

I read the report of the outcome of the consultation for the changes to the criteria for PIPs that focussed on aids and appliances. The government completely disagreed with the opinions of the 88 disability organisations who responded to the consultation documentation.

The organisations said the aids and appliances used by an individual were a useful indication of the person's disability and needs. It wasn't just about if the aid or appliance was needed or if they paid for it or not.

The government said it was not a useful indication because it wasn't possible to tell if the individual was advised to use any aids and appliances, or had simply chosen to do so. And that was that. The opinions of 88 disability organisations were simply overridden and there was more than one example of this in the report.

daphne I'm sorry to tell you this, but your mother can't qualify for the mobility component of DLA or PIP because of her age as a new claimant (over 65), so that means she can't get a Motability car. But I agree with Galen, you should appeal against the decision not to be awarded Attendance Allowance. I would also expect any medical examination to take place in her home and not at an examination centre.

BTW if someone getting the enhanced mobility rate of DLA or PIP doesn't drive, they can still apply for a Motability car and nominate drivers to drive them around. The nominated drivers do have to live within 5 miles of the disabled person and they can drive the car without the disabled person as a passenger. Many people see this option as an abuse of the system.

The car should then only be used for the benefit of the disabled person and no one else. The abuse happens when the driver uses it for their own personal affairs.

Exactly Galen. There's so many ways around this rule though.

So if I went shopping, I should use the bus if my husband was not in the car?
That's the blue badge. I never used it if he wasn't in the car.
However, whenever I went shopping, half of what I bought was for him.
So what should I have done?

Actually, that's not right. I never left him at home, because I would have been too worried about what he would have done on his own.
However, I am looking at it hypothetically.

The car is used by, or for the benefit of, the disabled person. This does not mean that the disabled person needs to be in the car for every journey. In practice, this means other named drivers in the household can use the car for shopping and other routine activities, as long as the disabled customer will benefit.

The answer to my own question, from the Motability website.

After he died, I was allowed to buy the Motability car - one careful owner.
We had had Motability cars for over ten years.
It came as quite a shock how much it costs to keep a car on the road.
When it gives up, I will not be buying another.

daphned
Arthritis, walks with a stick but is about 25 stone (at least).
Has always been huge so a chicken and egg situation.
Lovely daughter who is quite indiscreet.

how I can get a new car if other people without any disability can get one. I'm not saying that arthritis is not disabling, but that they are quite as well-off as anyone else in the street (indiscreet DD ) so why?
I presume if I wanted to I may be able to claim for a car, but we can afford to run one, so why should I take money from those who really need it just because I could?

daphnedil re your mum, I am sorry to hear that; my question too is why??

I do not believe people with no disability is given a car sorry
I didn't say she had no disability. See post above for explanation.

They had a lovely new car and her DD chatted away and told me about it.

Galen, you are claiming people applied for high mobility
Why would you disbelieve Galen, anniebach?

Yes, it does cost quite a lot to keep a car on the road. Not sure what your point is, dj.

As I said above, Motability change your car every three years. So anyone with a Motability car will have a new(ish) car.
After three years they cost more to service, so it makes sense.
If you see a three year old car with low mileage for sale, it will probably be a Motability car. They used to auction them off, but now anyone can buy them from dealers who sell Motability cars. Or even from family.
The last time we changed my son was able to buy his dad's old car. That was 2010 when they changed the rules.