swap from DLA to PIP

dibdabable

kingfisherblue wrote: »

My understanding (and I may be wrong ) is that if someone works and uses the mobility car for getting to and from work, but the disabled person is at home, then the worker can get home quickly should they need to do so. It obviously benefits the disabled person in terms of financial support, but if the working partner cannot get home quickly, then it could be detrimental to the disabled person.

Well I'd aready agreed with this principle, but do you really think that the only benefit to a disabled person being able to keep a job is financia

In an age when to be on benefits is likened to being a leper, what about the self esteem and self worth one receives by being an active member of society. If the able bodied driver didn't have a car he/she can still use public transport. To a disabled person a car is literally a life line. The fact that I don't have to ask my husband to drive me everywhere and I can have some semblance of independence is priceless to me, in a world I'm already partially cut from.
If I didn't have my car, I wouldn't just have difficulty (which would increase as the day went on) walking to a bus stop, but also in standing at the bustop, but they don't seem to be interested in the whole picture, which gives a much more complete understanding of the effects than these new measures will.

rotoguys

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

You know nothing of this individuals 'casework' my friend, as I said its back with a DM.

You only have to read the article to understand what the problem actually is.

Your slant on it is that people in coma's are found fit for work.

You are no better than some newspapers that see a better story by twisting the facts around.

MissMoneypenny

rotoguys wrote: »

It is well within the scheme that if the husband uses the car to get to and from a permanent place of employment and that by working and earning a salary, the disabled wife benefits in some way.

The terminology of use by the partner is that his actions or use of the car MUST provide some beneficial advantage to the wife.

In this case it does. No car, no work, no money.

With a car, goes to work, and provides beneficial financial support for the wife.

Motability will throw out a complaint like that is being suggested.

How about when he uses his wife's mobility car to go for days out 2 or 3 times a month, with his friend but without his disabled wife, because he "needs a break from her"?

His disabled wife uses friends' (non mobillity) cars on those days, to go out shopping. No stick and no support. I know this as the cctv outside my house, picks it all up.

clemmatis

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

How about when he uses his wife's mobility car to go for days out 2 or 3 times a month, with his friend but without his disabled wife, because he "needs a break from her"?

His disabled wife uses friends' (non mobillity) cars on those days, to go out shopping. No stick and no support. I know this as the cctv outside my house, picks it all up.

Fraud.

I checked. It seems Motability has said, bizarrely, in my view, that if someone in the husband's situation uses the car to commute to work that's OK because the wage/salary benefits the wife, so "rotoguy"'s correct. The "days out alone" use is not OK. It wouldn't be OK even if his wife "benefitted" by getting rid of him for a while.

rotoguys

clemmatis wrote: »

Fraud.

I checked. It seems Motability has said, bizarrely, in my view, that if someone in the husband's situation uses the car to commute to work that's OK because the wage/salary benefits the wife, so "rotoguy"'s correct. The "days out alone" use is not OK. It wouldn't be OK even if his wife "benefitted" by getting rid of him for a while.

Thank you!

It's all in the wording - the disabled person receives/has/is given a 'benefit' out of those actions.

yes I will agree that taking the car off on a lad's weekend away does NOT benefit the disabled person.

It is also the case that if the motability car is chosen by the husband for his own personal reasons (ie he prefers a large expensive 4x4 instead of a car) and the disabled wife has to put up or shut up, there is nothing that Motability can do about it provided that she has signed the documentation.
I am aware of this being the case where the disabled wife had no say in what car she wanted. The husband needed that type of vehicle for two reasons. One that it had to 'fit' in with his professional standing and two, he needed a vehicle to tow his power boat to the jetty at the weekends. He has just ordered a new X1 BMW

MissMoneypenny

kingfisherblue wrote: »

My understanding (and I may be wrong ) is that if someone works and uses the mobility car for getting to and from work, but the disabled person is at home, then the worker can get home quickly should they need to do so. It obviously benefits the disabled person in terms of financial support, but if the working partner cannot get home quickly, then it could be detrimental to the disabled person.

In the case I am talking about, the husband drives his wife's mobility car to the depot, where he leaves it; he is a train driver. He would never be able to get home quickly and the same when he goes for days out in the car without his wife: he leaves the car in a car park and catches a ferry.

The mobility car is only at the claimants disposal, when her husband is there too.

FBaby

kingfisherblue wrote: »

My understanding (and I may be wrong ) is that if someone works and uses the mobility car for getting to and from work, but the disabled person is at home, then the worker can get home quickly should they need to do so. It obviously benefits the disabled person in terms of financial support, but if the working partner cannot get home quickly, then it could be detrimental to the disabled person.

mmmm, wouldn't a taxi get you home just as quickly as using your own car? The disabled person could pay for that taxi journey with the DLA they receive...

honestly... it is right that someone who isn't entitled themselves to help with disability be able to get a free car just on the one off that they might need to hurry to get back to th disabled person.... if they work away and it is an emergency, the disabled person would be better off relying on a neighbour or calling 999 anyway.....

FBaby

clemmatis wrote: »

Fraud.

I checked. It seems Motability has said, bizarrely, in my view, that if someone in the husband's situation uses the car to commute to work that's OK because the wage/salary benefits the wife, so "rotoguy"'s correct. The "days out alone" use is not OK. It wouldn't be OK even if his wife "benefitted" by getting rid of him for a while.

I don't get this at all....why is the person relying on a free car to be able to get a job and therefore support his disabled partner????? Why can't he take public transport or afford a car like everyone else? And in any case, doesn't everyone benefit from their partner working?? In which way is it different if the partner is disabled, rather than say, a wife with three young children at home???

clemmatis

FBaby wrote: »

I don't get this at all....why is the person relying on a free car to be able to get a job and therefore support his disabled partner????? Why can't he take public transport or afford a car like everyone else? And in any case, doesn't everyone benefit from their partner working?? In which way is it different if the partner is disabled, rather than say, a wife with three young children at home???

I agree and I think the policy's silly, I'm amazed Motability said it.

kingfisherblue

I'm not saying I agree with it, I'm just saying that is my understanding of the policy.