No outgoings taken into consideration?

sarahg1969

zippy1969 wrote: »

If you have a TV...you are required to have a TV licence by law...regardless of how you use it. Effectively, it's because you have the capability and therefore the potential to watch TV programmes. Even if you only use the TV's USB capability...you still need a licence.

Even if you had a PVR...and no actual TV...you are still required to have a licence because the PVR contains a 'tuner' that can pick up regular TV...and record it.

Just a 'heads-up' as wouldn't want you to get caught out.

That's incorrect.

Chrissiew

FBaby wrote: »

So your husband doesn't have a car nor your DD, surely it is quite convenient that you have one that they can use even if you can't drive. I am not saying there's anything wrong with this as it is permitted, but surely that does contribute to the decision to keep the car rather than giving it up to use the money on other things. It might be for your benefit, but they are benefiting from it too which can't be totally neglected in terms of trade-off.

There you go again, jumping to the wrong conclusions, my daughters household does own a car which her husband uses to go to work in 6 days a week, 7am untill 6pm, oh should I tell her he should use public transport so she can have the car because someone on here feels I shouldn't have a motorbility car? Even though he pays for the tax, insurance, petrol, and upkeep of it, even though it would mean him leaving the house 2 hours earlier and arrive home 2 hours later? The ONLY benefit my daughter gets out of my car is when she takes me shopping and buys stuff for herself, she never ever asks if she can use it to go out in it herself, she never ever asks if she can use it to go shopping by herself, the only time she gets into the car is if I am in it as well.

My husband does not own a car no but again he never goes in it without me, even to get prescriptions I go with him just to get out of the house, just incase you jump to another wrong conclusion, when he goes to work he is picked up at the bottom of the road by a colleague who passes by, he is dropped off the same way, by the same colleague on the way home, if that person is on holiday or away sick or something then his boss will get him picked up, we live in a quiet area where public transport does not start untill after my husband should be at work. I hope this is a satisfactory explanation for you and you get it into your head that the motorbility car is for my use and my use only and I would not get rid of it even if I could.

xylophone

Re TV licence http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/
The horse's mouth.

OldMotherTucker

zippy1969 wrote: »

If you have a TV...you are required to have a TV licence by law...regardless of how you use it. Effectively, it's because you have the capability and therefore the potential to watch TV programmes. Even if you only use the TV's USB capability...you still need a licence.

Even if you had a PVR...and no actual TV...you are still required to have a licence because the PVR contains a 'tuner' that can pick up regular TV...and record it.

Just a 'heads-up' as wouldn't want you to get caught out.

TV liscensing people seem okay with it - one called about a month ago.
Showed him every TV in the house . .

OldMotherTucker

Chrissiew wrote: »

In the waiting list for pain clinic, you say it's not the best use of NHs resources, I agree and someone else is telling me to give up my car and phone an ambulance, that's an even bigger drain on the nhs

I'm suggesting that more effective pain management would eliminate the need for emergency out-of-hours pain relief - whatever the mode of transport.

But . . freeing up the mobility component of the DLA, using it to reduce existing debts for a short term (inconvenience verus substantially smaller or nil debts) but allow for emergency hospital trips by taxi - and that could be another option.

FBaby

No one has ever said you should give it up, what we are saying that it is about choice. You have so much income, if you are missing something you consider essential, you need to look at what else you can give up and the car would be the one thing that could provide you the most income for other things.

Many couples have to do with one car with the partner working using public transport so their partner can have the car during the day if they consider as a couple that they have more use of it.

Noone here is saying you should struggle with everything in life, however, most don't agree that you should be entitled to more, so most are helping with suggestions of how you could redirect your disposable income better. People have different priorities. I am pretty sure that in your position, I would choose to give up the car, do my shopping on-line or with my DD during the week-end, ask her if her partner would mind if she kept the car on the days you need to go to appointments, call an ambulance if I needed to go to A&E during the day, and use the occasional taxi when we required whilst using DLA for other things, but if you feel that having the total freedom of having a car instead, then that is your prerogative, which is fine, but you then might have to give up something else you also would like to have although not essential.

Dunroamin

FBaby wrote: »

No one has ever said you should give it up, what we are saying that it is about choice. You have so much income, if you are missing something you consider essential, you need to look at what else you can give up and the car would be the one thing that could provide you the most income for other things.

Many couples have to do with one car with the partner working using public transport so their partner can have the car during the day if they consider as a couple that they have more use of it.

Noone here is saying you should struggle with everything in life, however, most don't agree that you should be entitled to more, so most are helping with suggestion of how you could redirect your disposable income better. People have different priorities. I am pretty sure that in your position, I would choose to give up the car, do my shopping on-line or with my DD during the week-end, ask her if her partner would mind if she kept the car on the days you need to go to appointments, call an ambulance if I needed to go to A&E during the day, and use the occasional taxi when we required whilst using DLA for other things, but if you feel that having the total freedom of having a car instead, than that is your priority, which is fine, but you then might have to give up something else you also would like to have although not essential.

Life is about making choices.:)

mazza111

I still reckon it's a 3 year contract with motabilty cars. Don't think it's as easy to give up as everyone's saying

Chrissiew

mazza111 wrote: »

I still reckon it's a 3 year contract with motabilty cars. Don't think it's as easy to give up as everyone's saying

Yes your absolutely right it's a 3 year contract and not easy to give up, you can give it up if you lose your drivers but not because you have changed your mind and need the money instead as they say you should have thought of that in the first place.

zippy1969

sarahg1969 wrote: »

That's incorrect.

Ah, yes, I stand corrected.

I remember years ago, in the days of analogue Sky TV...someone who only had a monitor (no 'terrestrial tuner' incorporated) and just Sky...was still ordered to pay a TV licence as they had a terrestrial aerial outlet.

If you notice that a post is incorrect, can you post the correct information, possibly with a link such as 'xylophone' did below?

Cheers.