minimum amount to live on

Bollotom

sleepless_saver wrote: »

Could be that the consultant meant he had 65% of the normal range of movement, but if it doesn't actually say that in the appeal then I agree it messes up the claim completely.

OP it would be worth contacting the consultant and checking out exactly what is meant by the 65%, then sending any correction to DWP.

That's an excellent point. If he has 65 degree sweep either side or is it 30 degrees one side and 30 degrees the other side. You have to assume that these government bods are expert at pedantics and driving the outrage bus. :cool:

yummy-mummy-amy

thanks again.

as previously stated benefits have already stated that it would cost them more for me to go to work as they would have to provide childcare for my 2yr old which is more than the small amount they were paying for me on hubby's claim.

as for movement in hubbys neck - he has very little in turning it either way, but i can see what you mean that the 65% may not be helping issues - thing is you only have to look at hubby to see he cant turn it very well.

hadnt thought of MP etc, but hopefully with CAB and benefit advisor meeting this week we will get something sorted.