We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Benefit fraud
Comments
-
I'm pretty sure motibility cars aren't for claimants partners to use for their commute to work.
Here is a direct quote from motability website faq: linky here
"The car must be used by, or for the benefit of, the disabled person. This does not mean that the disabled person needs to be in the car for every journey. In practice, this means that other named drivers in the same household can use the car for shopping, visiting family and other routine activities, so long as the disabled customer will benefit."
Not sure how taking the car to work or visiting your own family alone benefits the disabled person!!!
And before anyone starts I was a wife/carer of a disabled husband after a stroke and we could have had a motability car but decided when looking in to it not worth it for us.
Yours
CalleyHope for everything and expect nothing!!!
Good enough is almost always good enough -Prof Barry Schwartz
If it scares you, it might be a good thing to try -Seth Godin0 -
I'm pretty sure motibility cars aren't for claimants partners to use for their commute to work.
I saw on another site that it is allowed as it directly benefit the disabled claimant, so in other words, if the person is going to work everyday to keep the house over the disabled persons head and keep them in food and clothes, then they were allowed to use the car.
She clearly would be working for the benefit of both of them.
It's just what I heard.0 -
I saw on another site that it is allowed as it directly benefit the disabled claimant, so in other words, if the person is going to work everyday to keep the house over the disabled persons head and keep them in food and clothes, then they were allowed to use the car.
She clearly would be working for the benefit of both of them.
It's just what I heard.
Sorry its utter rubbish it's directly benefiting the disabled person.
if they have always worked like me and my husband they would already be running a car!!! But in this case they are taking £200 ish a month of the disabled persons money off them to have a car!!! And if the disabled person could drive they are then carless as its not at home for them to use.
Also if the disabled person lived alone or neither in the couple worked they would get help with paying there rent etc!!!
Just does not wash or sit well with me morally or ethically. But each to there own.
Yours
CalleyHope for everything and expect nothing!!!
Good enough is almost always good enough -Prof Barry Schwartz
If it scares you, it might be a good thing to try -Seth Godin0 -
Motability are happy for customers to use the car for a partner's commute. Working brings money into the household, which benefits the claimant.
However, it breaks the DVLA rules regarding the free tax disc.
There's no option to have a motability car and pay the tax yourself, so a partner using the car for a commute shouldn't happen.Unless I say otherwise 'you' means the general you not you specifically.0 -
Sorry its utter rubbish it's directly benefiting the disabled person.
if they have always worked like me and my husband they would already be running a car!!! But in this case they are taking £200 ish a month of the disabled persons money off them to have a car!!! And if the disabled person could drive they are then carless as its not at home for them to use.
Also if the disabled person lived alone or neither in the couple worked they would get help with paying there rent etc!!!
Just does not wash or sit well with me morally or ethically. But each to there own.
Yours
Calley
It's not how I have it, I don't have a mobilty car even on high rate mobility DLA, however I can understand it from both ways.
in the instance I was talking about, the parent used the car to get to work as otherwise he couldn't get there and with the added costs of their disabled child they couldn't afford another car. He then used it to go to work and keep the child in food and a house, and also used the car to take the child around too.
I don't know the technicalities of it all, but I was just saying I believe you are allowed to use it for work at times, especially if you have asked for permission.0 -
Or one that was willing to take more risks? You only see one half of the picture. I am not a doctor, so I don't know what all the risks are in an individual case. I assume you are not either. It isn't as easy as "want / get".
I am not arguing that medical procedures shouldn't be available to people who need them. But you are using too general and too sweeping statements. Procedures aren't as available in England - well yes, they are. Maybe not everywhere - but I do not personally live everywhere so I wouldn't know. But that depends on a lot of circumstances. You've already come up with the whole of Yorkshire as being an example - well it isn't. It just isn't as simple as "take one example and apply to everything".
Yes, medicine ought not to be dependant on financial constraints. But in the real world there are such constraints. Money is finite everywhere. And when choices have to be made, someone loses. Maybe in Scotland you don't have any financial constraints and you can spend endlessly on whatever you want. That's nice. But it can't last for ever either, because, in the end, you can't print money and then there will be choices to make. I don't happen to agree with the governments choices in England, but until someone explains to me how we pay for all the services we want with the amount of money available, there will always be tough choices.
Financial constraints I understand, but in the NHS they are not applied consistently. "Maybe not everywhere" just isn't good enough. If you're in a situation where the alternative is walking upright or being crippled, surely it's fair to give you the procedure you need, not tell you the NHS trust in the area you are in can't afford it?
You'ld have to be English living in Scotland to really understand my point of view. There's so much more public money available up here than there is in England. I speak of Yorkshire only because I have family there. Yorkshire has a similar population to Scotland but nowhere near the same public funds. Why shouldn't people in England have the same access to NHS services as the Scots have? I don't have to see a border post to know when I've crossed from Scotland into England on any of the minor roads. It's obvious. The state of the roads deteriorate.
Benefit fraud? The distribution of the public purse is a fraud on the people of England. If we don't have enough money for something as critical as the NHS to our health, then we should be having a medicare levy, levied on the first pound of everyone's income.0 -
I'm pretty sure motibility cars aren't for claimants partners to use for their commute to work.
allow me to give you a different scenario.
i am not providibg information in order to make a point.
this is TRUE.
my middle grandson contracted viral eencephalitis at 18 months old. he passed away 4 weeks before his 4th birthday.
he was a big boy. not heavy but tall. in fact he was as heavy and as tall as his brother who was 2 years older.
they needed a large car in order to accommodate the 'turntable' car seat that they needed to transport their severely disabled son.
it was nigh on impossible to manoeuvre him in a normal sizes family car.
so every morning the whole family would get into the car.
drop they youngest off at nursery and the older boy at school.
then they BOTH went off to work.
after a day at work they collected the elder boy from after school club, and then the younger boy from nursery.
do you seriously think they should have used there larger car for5 only the disabled childs commute>
then go home and transfer to a smaller car ... drop the older boy to school and go to work ...
then collect the older boy, go home and change cars and then collect the younger boy?
did it benefit bot6h children that their parents worked and supported them?
bearing in mind that the DLA would have been in payment regardless of if they used it for a car?0 -
allow me to give you a different scenario.
i am not providibg information in order to make a point.
this is TRUE.
my middle grandson contracted viral eencephalitis at 18 months old. he passed away 4 weeks before his 4th birthday.
he was a big boy. not heavy but tall. in fact he was as heavy and as tall as his brother who was 2 years older.
they needed a large car in order to accommodate the 'turntable' car seat that they needed to transport their severely disabled son.
it was nigh on impossible to manoeuvre him in a normal sizes family car.
so every morning the whole family would get into the car.
drop they youngest off at nursery and the older boy at school.
then they BOTH went off to work.
after a day at work they collected the elder boy from after school club, and then the younger boy from nursery.
do you seriously think they should have used there larger car for5 only the disabled childs commute>
then go home and transfer to a smaller car ... drop the older boy to school and go to work ...
then collect the older boy, go home and change cars and then collect the younger boy?
did it benefit bot6h children that their parents worked and supported them?
bearing in mind that the DLA would have been in payment regardless of if they used it for a car?
I'm sorry for you loss.
I don't think that situation is at all the same as the disabled person being left at home while the partner uses the car for their commute.0 -
I know of someone who has a motability car. For the most part, his daughter has it to get to work, take the kids to school, etc, and the car stays at her house. He doesn't live particularly near them and the daughter takes him shopping every couple of weeks. The daughter has no mobility issues, nor have her teenage children.
He says it's ok as he can say who drives the car and who doesnt... I say it's wrong. I have no problem with him having the car, as he's on the highest rate of disability and when he does have the car he drives it without a problem.0 -
Financial constraints I understand, but in the NHS they are not applied consistently. "Maybe not everywhere" just isn't good enough. If you're in a situation where the alternative is walking upright or being crippled, surely it's fair to give you the procedure you need, not tell you the NHS trust in the area you are in can't afford it?
You'ld have to be English living in Scotland to really understand my point of view. There's so much more public money available up here than there is in England. I speak of Yorkshire only because I have family there. Yorkshire has a similar population to Scotland but nowhere near the same public funds. Why shouldn't people in England have the same access to NHS services as the Scots have? I don't have to see a border post to know when I've crossed from Scotland into England on any of the minor roads. It's obvious. The state of the roads deteriorate.
Benefit fraud? The distribution of the public purse is a fraud on the people of England. If we don't have enough money for something as critical as the NHS to our health, then we should be having a medicare levy, levied on the first pound of everyone's income.
If the state of the roads here is any indication then you couldn't be more wrong.Lost my soulmate so life is empty.
I can bear pain myself, he said softly, but I couldna bear yours. That would take more strength than I have -
Diana Gabaldon, Outlander0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards