Gransnet forums

News & politics

Crazy benefits system need an overhaul

(219 Posts)
Poly580 Sat 20-May-17 18:00:52

I am absolutely in shock that a friend has just visited in a £47,000 Volvo given to them by the state. The only only additional payment was a deposit of £3,100. They also get free road tax, parking, tires and apparently don't have to worry where they park as they just give the vehicle back in two years time for a new one. Scratches aren't a problem.

I knew people could get a top up benefit, mobility, that they can give to a car dealer for a car but I was expecting a vehicle of much smaller value.

I am not against the disabled being helped and supported, that's a given for me but this is a step too far.

Why have they allowed this benefit to get to this level?

We live In an age were children are about to be denied free school dinners when it's possibly the only hot meal they may have all day, pensioners dying because they are being refused heating payment, people denied cancer drugs because we can't afford it, homeless.....the list goes on.

1. Why not reduce the value for the cars as this figure seems disproportionate and wrong.
2. You should not be able to buy a car of this value on benefits when somebody working 40 hours per week could not afford to do so.
3. Do a deal with a car manufacturer ( all the British ones have gone) who employees British people and at least let our own country benefit from employment in manufacturing.
4. If you can afford £3,100 deposit for a 4x4 then you are receiving too much benefit.
5. You won't die without a car but you might through lack of food, heating or treatment. Cheaper cars should be given and then share the rest of the funds amongst the needy.
Is anyone else shocked at the value of the cars you can get on the benefits system?

durhamjen Mon 22-May-17 19:58:22

Well said, nannieann.

nannieann Mon 22-May-17 19:01:30

Socities can be measured by how they look after their less fortunate members. The motability scheme is a way of giving disabled people a small taste of the freedom that the more fortunate can take for granted. Let's all be thankful that Mrs Thatcher was wrong- there is such a thing as society. We still live in a civilised country, thank God. I'm grateful that I don't need a motability car.

Hopehope Mon 22-May-17 18:52:12

Sorry Gardenman I must have been on another planet this morning. Sell me? Nobody would take me for free grin

Blownupdolly Mon 22-May-17 16:13:34

You are right Elegran. Both me and my husband can drive my car, but officially he can only use it to do things on my behalf. He doesn't need to use it though.

He is a forensic psychiatric nurse who deals with prisoners, and people in custody at various different courts and police stations, so he travels a lot. He was given a car to use for work, much to our neighbours annoyance. Two brand new cars outside has driven the odd green eyed monster crazy. Ironically, I'm just not a materialistic person. I wouldn't care if it was a1980s Datsun as long as it took me where I needed to go.

Elegran Mon 22-May-17 15:34:51

But not to "have the use of the car" on their own behalf. That is why I wondered whether they had bought it when the three-year rental was over.

Nezumi65 Mon 22-May-17 15:01:53

Yes you can use the car providing it is benefitting the person in some way (shopping, picking up prescriptions etc).

durhamjen Mon 22-May-17 14:46:21

No, they haven't changed.

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
Only named drivers listed on your Certificate of Motor Insurance can drive the car*
That you let us know about any changes that may affect your lease.

durhamjen Mon 22-May-17 14:44:56

It used to be that legally you could use a Motability car even if the person who had the car was not in it, providing you were doing something for that person.
Have the rules changed? Otherwise you couldn't take a person somewhere, leave him, then collect him later.

Are you getting mixed up with the blue badge, Elegran?

Elegran Mon 22-May-17 14:38:01

Glenfinna Legally, they don't have use of the Motability car unless he is in it. His taxi and train are not paid for if he has opted to use his allowance to rent the car.

Are you sure his parents didn't take the option to buy the car on his behalf from the Motability suppliers when his three-year rental finished, so as to have it available when he travels with them, and use it themselves when he doesn't? Meanwhile he may be using his £58 a week allowance on taxis.

Glenfinnan Mon 22-May-17 14:23:32

There does seem to be a wide discrepancy in benefits I think. We have friends who have a 20 year old son and they have a mobility vehicle for him. But now he has started work he has a daily taxi pick him up to take home to the station and then he goes on the train. They have use of the car and their son is very rarely in it as he prefers taxi/train which are all paid for. But I still wouldn't like their responsibilities and lives. A neighbour has just had his vehicle taken off him as he no longer qualifies. Different areas seem to have different rules.

durhamjen Mon 22-May-17 13:55:40

Lucky all my grandchildren are socialist, then.

rosesarered Mon 22-May-17 13:50:24

grin

Elegran Mon 22-May-17 13:43:19

Are they planning that if they get in, gardenman ? Where does it say that?

Gardenman99 Mon 22-May-17 12:34:10

Hope hope. I have no objection whatsoever to pepole having a mobility car it is the grab all give nothing back Tories who take the cars off those who need them. Even worst than the Tories are those who vote for them-knowing full well that the Tories would sell their own grandmother.

mcem Mon 22-May-17 10:05:02

I'd like to thank Nezumi for her posts too.
Very clear and rational explanations and despite become understandably a little frustrated by some posters' inability to grasp the point, she carried on.
Life must be hard enough coping 24/7 in that situation without pig-headed critics making it even worse.
Hope to see more of you nezumi.

Hopehope Mon 22-May-17 09:47:52

Oh sorry Elegran

Elegran Mon 22-May-17 09:40:04

It was eloethan Very similar name!

Elegran Mon 22-May-17 09:39:00

It wasn't me who commented, Hopehope I thought you were still replying to his earlier post about the private firms making unfair profits from the taxpayer (which they are not)

Hopehope Mon 22-May-17 09:34:18

Elegran my post to gardenman was regarding him harping on about the tax payer as thougj no disabled people have ever paid tax. I agree with Vamp her post makes alot of sense

Elegran Mon 22-May-17 09:29:59

Being headlined in the GN daily email could be a good thing, so long as people read the actual thread and see the reality, and don't just agree with the original poster automatically.

GracesGranMK2 Mon 22-May-17 09:26:13

Well said MawBroon.

Rosieroe Mon 22-May-17 09:14:48

Well said Maw.

MawBroon Mon 22-May-17 07:56:51

Having read, compared and contrasted OP's "rant" with, for instance the sad reality of the situation from nanaandgrampy and SallyDapp among others I feel OP should be highly embarrassed, ashamed even , of getting the wrong end of the stick and then beating people about the head with it.
These scare stories make for good headlines in the gutter press or certain TV channels, but are extremely distressing to those in genuine need. It reflects badly on GN to be "headlined" in their daily email and projects an image of clucking, tutting, prejudiced and disapproving old biddies.
Not in my name Gransnet.
It must be hard enough to see the threat of these "benefits" (I use the term advisedly as they are hardly more than a helping hand) being whittled away without also being made to feel that they do not deserve our consideration and a bit of human kindness sad

Nezumi65 Mon 22-May-17 07:32:20

The only thing to add is that DLA/PIP are paid at different rates dependent on the level of disability. You can only access the Motability scheme if you are in receipt of higher rate mobility DLA/enhanced rate mobility PIP. So the scheme is reserved for the 'most' disabled.

Norah Mon 22-May-17 07:06:09

I read the entire thread, twice, to digest. Please tell me if I am incorrect. Oh right, you will. grin

I think DLA and PIP are not means tested and whether the person is working is not important to the scheme either. I don't think that matters, everyone deserves health care and related services.

The disabled person receives a certain set sum, weekly, to do with as they wish. One third of the DLA PIP people enter the 3 yr car scheme, using their DLA Motability funds to a car.

Free school lunches will still be available for people who need the help and others may buy school lunches for a fee or take a packed lunch from home.

Parents who can afford it will be paying for their children's lunches.

Affect to taxes, after the election. I copied from durhamjen Sun 21-May-17 19:06:49 (because I could not do the maths) "If the Tories get back in they will change the tax thresholds, so that the change from 20-40% is at £50,000, not the present £45,000. This means that those who earn over £50,000 will get a rebate of 20% on the £5000, which is an extra £1000. At the moment they pay 40% of that £5000 between £45,000 and £50,000, which is £2000."

Not clear to me, the winter heating allowance will continue without means testing, maybe?

To dementia tax, I do not know, not clear at all to me.