patient and carer travel expenses

DorsetGirl_2

rotoguys wrote: »

Yes it seems I have. Dorsetgirl and Copa Feela have already been warned by MSE to refrain from doing exactly that.

Err, no I havent!

rotoguys

DorsetGirl wrote: »

Err, no I havent!

yeah....... oops what's that......

Ugnaught

kingfisherblue wrote: »

When you are away for more than five hours, you can take a flask and a packed lunch with you. I'm not sure what other expenses you would have apart from transport - what are you expecting to spend while you are away from home for part of the day? Is it relevant to your appointment?

Would it be reasonable to claim £4.75 to buy a meal for being away from home for more than 5 hours?

Zziggi

rotoguys wrote: »

That isn't the case! How are you supposed to 'prove' that you have put fuel in your car?

I put mine in once every 3 weeks - 12 galls.

Am I supposed to keep the receipt for £80 of diesel for 3 weeks? What does it prove anyhow?

I have yet to hear of a petrol claim or even a toll road/bridge claim being denied because of not having receipts.
I can just see it on the M25 at Dartford, scraping together the 1p's 5p's and then asking for a written receipt! You have more chance of getting a bloody nose than a receipt with that carry on!

As for it not covering the fuel cost, you must be driving an expensive car or that it has a too big an engine.
I run a 2.0 diesel Astra that returns me over 50mpg - more if it is a long motorway journey.

I am paid 15p a mile at the hospital. The hospital is a 600 mile round trip and I receive £90. I use nearly a full tank - about 11 gallons which has cost me £77. The extra £13 pays for the teas and coffee on the journey.

I suppose I should have made myself clearer. When claiming travel expenses at the two hospitals i visit, both ask for a petrol receipt (from last couple of weeks) and then refer to their own chart about how many miles where you live is away from the hospital and pay accordingly. I suppose producing a petrol receipt is just another hoop to jump through in addition to production of the original appointment letter (what happens if appointment is made over the phone?), the slip signed to say that you attended your appointment (why would i travel to one of my hospital about 50 miles away and claim my travel costs on-site but not attend my appointment?) As for the toll road/bridge receipt - let me assure you, they absolutely do insist on this! They also insist on a benefit letter dated no more than 28 days ago. I can understand the need for this BUT for those on long-term benefits, the DWP simply does not issue letters that frequently. As soon as I get a hospital letter through I must ring up the DWP to ask for a letter stating our entitlement. They get rather cheesed off at sending these letters and have told me to tell the cashiers dept at the hospital that my entitlement has not changed. Of course they don't buy this!. The other problem I CONSTANTLY have is that the benefit claim is in my partner's name. So when it is MY hospital appointment the cashier says "but the letter is not in your name". To get round this I asked the DWP to write me a letter stating that Mr. Zziggi had a wife Mrs. Zziggi who was in the same claim and lived at the same address. So what happened? Next time I went with a benefit letter dated WITHIN 28 days they quibbled because the additional letter which stated I was on Mr. Zziggi's claim was NOT dated within 28 days. !!!!!!..... all for less than a fiver.

rotoguys

Zziggi wrote: »

I suppose I should have made myself clearer. When claiming travel expenses at the two hospitals i visit, both ask for a petrol receipt (from last couple of weeks) and then refer to their own chart about how many miles where you live is away from the hospital and pay accordingly. I suppose producing a petrol receipt is just another hoop to jump through in addition to production of the original appointment letter (what happens if appointment is made over the phone?), the slip signed to say that you attended your appointment (why would i travel 50 miles and claim my travel costs on-site but not attend my appointment?) As for the toll road/bridge receipt - let me assure you, they absolutely do insist on this!

Well I have never been asked to support the Dartford River Crossing nor the M6 Toll.

I'll have to remember for next time - got an appointment on the 29th. And if I get a bloody nose for causing chaos at the Darford Crossing and holding up 3 miles of traffic looking for some change amongst the fluff in my pocket AND then insisting on a receipt at one of the un manned booths, I know who to come to!!!

Zziggi

rotoguys wrote: »

Well I have never been asked to support the Dartford River Crossing nor the M6 Toll.

I'll have to remember for next time - got an appointment on the 29th. And if I get a bloody nose for causing chaos at the Darford Crossing and holding up 3 miles of traffic looking for some change amongst the fluff in my pocket AND then insisting on a receipt at one of the un manned booths, I know who to come to!!!

You do that roto!

What gets me about it, is, that given my location there is simply no way I could reasonably get to the hospital without using the toll road/bridge. In fact once when they first introduced this system and I had forgotten to get a receipt, the reason they gave for not paying up was that I might have gone round instead of using the toll road/bridge. I pointed out that it would be miles and miles and miles out of my way and make my claim far, far larger than if they just assumed I went by the quickest route and used the toll road/bridge. They refused the whole claim. I haven't forgotten to get a receipt since.

suburbanwifey

I don't claim any benefits and never have, but just reading this thread out of interest. My opinion is that if they are demanding you go to appointments, that they make at their convenience, at their place of choice, they should pay for your transport. I don't know how much benefit claimants get, but I'm sure its not enough to have to pay for also traveling to and fro to these ridiculous appointments they make you go through. I spend many an hour on here reading the horror stories, glad I don't have to claim any benefits, it sounds horrendous! and having to pay to jump through their hoops ever worse. I agree with the poster saying 'do they provide food' but there again I have a sense of entitlement when others demand I do something that is ultimately for their benefit (ie: ATOS are probably gonna fail you as soon as you walk in the room, as that seems to be the case!) so why on earth do some of you think it is wrong to ask them to pay for all your inconvenience? Benefits don't pay enough to end up traveling all over the country or do they??

FBaby

suburbanwifey wrote: »

I agree with the poster saying 'do they provide food' but there again I have a sense of entitlement when others demand I do something that is ultimately for their benefit (ie: ATOS are probably gonna fail you as soon as you walk in the room, as that seems to be the case!) so why on earth do some of you think it is wrong to ask them to pay for all your inconvenience? Benefits don't pay enough to end up traveling all over the country or do they??

Interesting way to look at it.... I would have thought going to a medical to provide evidence that the claimant is entitled to benefits paid out of tax money IS for the benefit of the claimant, not the tax payer... Similarly, if a patient has to travel to an medical appointment, it is foremost for THEIR health benefits, no one else.

Saying that, it is rare for any patient to have to travel regularly so far away, most disorders can be treated in the local specialist centres.

FBaby

suburbanwifey wrote: »

Benefits don't pay enough to end up traveling all over the country or do they??

If you consider that someone on benefits, including disability benefits will find themselves in most cases with more disposable income than the average family, yet no travel cost to go to work, is it really so unreasonable to expect them to pay for the travel to receive healthcare?

suburbanwifey

FBaby wrote: »

If you consider that someone on benefits, including disability benefits will find themselves in most cases with more disposable income than the average family, yet no travel cost to go to work, is it really so unreasonable to expect them to pay for the travel to receive healthcare?

I agree with your point, hadn't really thought about it like that, thanks.