Disability Discrimination Act 2005

chattychappy

If the trust fund is paying him an income, then he should be able to include this in any income calculation. But it seems that this is not the real barrier.

You've asked a direct legal question so should (or rather he should) probably get legal advice from a qualified source - and I believe there are a number of charities who might be able to help, this question must come up again and again. From what you have said, in my opinion (I'm a lawyer, but this isn't my area of law and anyway I can't give real advice over the forum) this isn't a case of discrimination within the DDA for the reasons already discussed by other posters.

savagej

Why unemployed?

I have an income for life (you could get fired tomorrow and end up on jobseekers allowance, I will be on this until the day I die so I am a better credit risk than an employed person) and I am unable to work due to disability, I am not unemployed, I have a guaranteed income for life and my situation mirrors that of someone retired. So after speaking to the lending section at the bank they agreed retired on medical reasons.

If you know any underwriters I would ask them about the risk possed by someone on a life award of high DLA and someone who current works for the RBS.

So I would disagree.

savagej

You have gone abit quiet DMG, any particular reason?

Theboysmum

I would hesitate to say categorically that my son has a guaranteed income for life as far as DSS benefits are concerned given the current government debates, although the trust's income is almost guaranteed to be regular, dependable and for life (also 3x the benefit amount). My son's circumstances are very similar to savagej, who is correct in suggesting that being employed is, in reality, the least secure of all the options. It is the option over which you have the least control. You could suddenly be plunged into the abyss without warning i.e. sacked/redundant - the employed person has little control over his employer's actions or business practice.

The trust fund is not paying him an income per se (not allowed under trust rules) but the assets and income generated therefrom can be used for his benefit with the agreement of the trustees (myself and my son). The trust fund is treated as an entirely separate legal entity and has to file tax returns on the basis of a taxpayer at that rate of income.

Although I take the point that credit agencies will cite unemployment as the reason for being declined it seems somewhat unequitable that the temporarily unemployed person could find employment and therefore access credit facilities, whereas the permanently disabled person will forever have to tick the unemployed box. Thus there appears to be permanent exclusion for the long term disabled to an extent not practised on the temporarily unemployed. Incapacity Benefit is paid on the basis that the recipient is not expected to be seeking work but is unable to work as a result of a medical condition; this not 'unemployed' and should not be treated as such.

Fang_3

Theboysmum wrote: »

I would hesitate to say categorically that my son has a guaranteed income for life as far as DSS benefits are concerned given the current government debates, although the trust's income is almost guaranteed to be regular, dependable and for life (also 3x the benefit amount). My son's circumstances are very similar to savagej, who is correct in suggesting that being employed is, in reality, the least secure of all the options. It is the option over which you have the least control. You could suddenly be plunged into the abyss without warning i.e. sacked/redundant - the employed person has little control over his employer's actions or business practice.

The trust fund is not paying him an income per se (not allowed under trust rules) but the assets and income generated therefrom can be used for his benefit with the agreement of the trustees (myself and my son). The trust fund is treated as an entirely separate legal entity and has to file tax returns on the basis of a taxpayer at that rate of income.

Although I take the point that credit agencies will cite unemployment as the reason for being declined it seems somewhat unequitable that the temporarily unemployed person could find employment and therefore access credit facilities, whereas the permanently disabled person will forever have to tick the unemployed box. Thus there appears to be permanent exclusion for the long term disabled to an extent not practised on the temporarily unemployed. Incapacity Benefit is paid on the basis that the recipient is not expected to be seeking work but is unable to work as a result of a medical condition; this not 'unemployed' and should not be treated as such.

Credit is not a right, it is a privilege and therefore there is no reason that your son should be treated any differently from someone else unemployed because there are a multitude of reasons why someone may be unemployed, and the lenders don't care.

You have not mentioned a single reason why he needs a credit card. A debit card will be perfectly adequate, so he should use that.

Theboysmum

A debit card is adequate only to the value of the money in the current account at the time the debit card is used. On a small income which covers not much more than car insurance, petrol and gym fees, that precludes any purchase above about £50. As the credit card ads say - use a credit card to spread the cost of those bigger items. In a world which revolves around credit the 'need' for a credit card seems fairly obvious.

Thank you to those who have given advice on enhancing his chances, useful suggestions.

Fang_3

Theboysmum wrote: »

A debit card is adequate only to the value of the money in the current account at the time the debit card is used. On a small income which covers not much more than car insurance, petrol and gym fees, that precludes any purchase above about £50. As the credit card ads say - use a credit card to spread the cost of those bigger items. In a world which revolves around credit the 'need' for a credit card seems fairly obvious.

Thank you to those who have given advice on enhancing his chances, useful suggestions.

So therefore he should be treated exactly the same as someone with the same income. Regardless of why he is unemployed. It is nothing to do with his disability. Is there a reason that he cannot save up for such eventualities? That's what others have to do in the same situation.

dmg24

savagej wrote: »

You have gone abit quiet DMG, any particular reason?

I had gone quiet because I have a life away from MSE!

You seem a little confused regarding benefit entitlement. There is no such thing as a lifetime entitlement to DLA. You may have an indefinite entitlement, but this can be reviewed (and hence lowered or even taken away altogether) at any time.

Whilst an employed persons income can be taken away, such a risk can be insured against. If benefits are removed, the claimant is quite possibly left with nothing.

OP, I would seriously reconsider the 'need' for credit. It is very easy to get into such a mentality, but incredibly difficult to get out of such a pattern. Living to your means would be a much better lesson to learn, and whilst not so easy in the short term, much more productive in the longer term.

robpw2

what about one of these pre-paid cards like the o2 money card
i would say that if its to do with his credit score he needs to take out some credit to build it up and the best way to do that is probably a phone or a higher intrest credit card or overdraft through bank as he has never had credit it will cause issues .

Fang_3

dmg24 wrote: »

I had gone quiet because I have a life away from MSE!

You seem a little confused regarding benefit entitlement. There is no such thing as a lifetime entitlement to DLA. You may have an indefinite entitlement, but this can be reviewed (and hence lowered or even taken away altogether) at any time.

Whilst an employed persons income can be taken away, such a risk can be insured against. If benefits are removed, the claimant is quite possibly left with nothing.

OP, I would seriously reconsider the 'need' for credit. It is very easy to get into such a mentality, but incredibly difficult to get out of such a pattern. Living to your means would be a much better lesson to learn, and whilst not so easy in the short term, much more productive in the longer term.

I completely agree. I wish so much that I had kept my savings rather than spending them on a holiday before I went to uni and relied on my student overdraft. It's so much wiser in the long run to save money regularly instead of relying on expensive credit.