Winter fuel payment suggestion

Spoonie_Turtle

matelodave said:

I still struggle with the concept that someone who works or worked, paid NI and taxes, saved some money, subscribed to a pension and bought their own house and is paying tax on his earnings or pension payments should be subsidising anyone who did none of those things.  

Whereas the person who did none of that gets a pension which is topped up to the same level as someone who actually paid NI but, unlike the person who paid his NI also gets the add ons, such as housing benefit, council tax benefit, winter fuel allowance, free glasses and dental care plus whatever else is being given away (cheap broadband etc). and will probably get care payments or care paid for as well, where the person who worked for it all will have to watch it all evaporate if the time comes.

My mates wife has dementia and needs help. He is 87 and she is 84 but because they both worked and have some savings the only help they can get is around £70 a week attendance allowance which doesn't go ever so far towards the £60 a day which they have to pay for a drop in carer twice a day.

Social Services said come back when all the money has run out and we'll reappraise the situation but until then you are on your own.

They will also lose the £300 WFA as they don't get pension credit - Doesn't really seem fair does it.

I hope they actually said come back when the savings drop down to about £23,000, wherever the actual threshold is.  It's terrible when people use up everything they have before claiming and miss out on help they were entitled to.

State funded care can be absolutely dire; while the level of benefits and thresholds for financial help are their own issue, the fact remains that beong able to choose your own care is often infinitely better than being stuck in whatever facility the LA will deign to fund.

Housing Benefit is not applicable to people who own their house.  Council Tax Support can still be assessed on income (as can HB for those who do rent), pensioners don't only have to receive Pension Credit to qualify. 
Though people who have savings high enough deemed to be the means to live would of course not qualify.

Also the NHS Low Income Scheme should be more widely known, particularly for asset rich cash poor pensioners.

---
Also just a note in general - I see a lot of discussion refer to the WFP as £300, but that only applies to over 80s (as in the above post).  For those under 80 it's £200.  Still a significant chunk of money for people to lose if they're struggling or on the border of struggling, but accuracy is important.

baser999

My mothers in a care home, self funding, and yet receives fuel allowance 🤔 Doesn’t seem right, but all helps towards her fees I suppose 

Spoonie_Turtle

baser999 said:

My mothers in a care home, self funding, and yet receives fuel allowance 🤔 Doesn’t seem right, but all helps towards her fees I suppose 

The change is recent, she'll have got it in previous years but she may not get it this year if they stick with the plan to restrict it to people receiving Pension Credit.

cannugec5

Something had to change. I have a British relative who has decided to live in The Canaries. Until now he has still received the WFA - said it helped contribute to the AC costs! 

MikeJXE

Just for comparison 

I am 83 and rent a flat at £625 a month  with state pension plus £1250 a year private, £60,000 in savings

I don't mind losing my £300 if it helps us out of this mess

My friend and partner also renting but a bungalow at £1200 a month are the same age, state pension plus huge private pensions

Savings in excess of £600,000 and £400,000 respectively 

Both moaning about the loss of their WFP

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

matelodave said:

I still struggle with the concept that someone who works or worked, paid NI and taxes, saved some money, subscribed to a pension and bought their own house and is paying tax on his earnings or pension payments should be subsidising anyone who did none of those things.  

Whereas the person who did none of that gets a pension which is topped up to the same level as someone who actually paid NI but, unlike the person who paid his NI also gets the add ons, such as housing benefit, council tax benefit, winter fuel allowance, free glasses and dental care plus whatever else is being given away (cheap broadband etc). and will probably get care payments or care paid for as well, where the person who worked for it all will have to watch it all evaporate if the time comes.

Very difficult as they either give that kind of money to people who don't need it or they leave people who do need it to fend for themselves, neither would be popular. 

Perhaps they could allow those on pension credit to work without losing their benefit but instead have the amount given slide but I assume there are consequences to this?

Part of the issue is profit in care, when my grandparents were in a care home the owner was driving a £100k car. 

Interesting article on the BBC where Wales wishes to remove profit from residential and foster care for kids:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czkv09lvv0xo

Ideally the state would provide high quality care to those who need it but sadly, as with a lot of services provided by the state, without the desire for profit the service seems to suffer as well as being tied up with the heavy expenses of bureaucracy. 

NedS

matelodave said:

NedS said:

Brian3357 said:

Martin suggested that the winter fuel allowance could be determined by the government using council tax bands a to d to allocate an allowance for pensioners. 

I feel this  criteria is unfair. Just because a pensioner lives in an F band, doesn't mean they have more disposable incomse. Indeed often the opposite as the house is feaer to run. Asset rich but cash poor! Surely a fairer method is possible 

Fair to whom? The tax payer or the asset rich pensioner?

I fear the government's response to the asset rich pensioner would be to sell your band F house, down size and reallocate your wealth more evenly across housing and income generation to live within your means rather than expecting the tax payer to support you to continue to live beyond your means.

You seem to not understand that your so called "asset rich pensioner" has probably paid more in tax and NI and therefore has paid for not only his pension but that of those who didn't work or contribute. Why should he be expected to downsize just so he can contribute even more.

Council tax bands have no bearing on ones ability to pay their bills and there are plenty of people who are living in subsidised accommodation that many of us cant afford. Perhaps some of them should be shifted into a place or area more in keeping with their income.

Without getting political all I can see is a government of resentment and jealously who really want to bring everyone down to the same level. Perhaps there should be a lot more effort in helping people live within their own means without expecting others to keep funding it all.

@matelodave I'm not sure how you could possibly surmise what I may or may not understand from my post? I was offering my opinion on what the government's view/response may be, which is not necessarily the same as my own view. But you seem to have confused the two.

Bendo

matelodave said:

I still struggle with the concept that someone who works or worked, paid NI and taxes, saved some money, subscribed to a pension and bought their own house and is paying tax on his earnings or pension payments should be subsidising anyone who did none of those things.  

Whereas the person who did none of that gets a pension which is topped up to the same level as someone who actually paid NI but, unlike the person who paid his NI also gets the add ons, such as housing benefit, council tax benefit, winter fuel allowance, free glasses and dental care plus whatever else is being given away (cheap broadband etc). and will probably get care payments or care paid for as well, where the person who worked for it all will have to watch it all evaporate if the time comes.

My mates wife has dementia and needs help. He is 87 and she is 84 but because they both worked and have some savings the only help they can get is around £70 a week attendance allowance which doesn't go ever so far towards the £60 a day which they have to pay for a drop in carer twice a day.

Social Services said come back when all the money has run out and we'll reappraise the situation but until then you are on your own.

They will also lose the £300 WFA as they don't get pension credit - Doesn't really seem fair does it.

Indeed, we really should be letting the poor freeze to death, after all, its their own fault really and they are of no benefit to society really.

Jesus Christ, I really despair some of the absolute !!!!!! that gets spouted online.

BarelySentientAI

Bendo said:

matelodave said:

I still struggle with the concept that someone who works or worked, paid NI and taxes, saved some money, subscribed to a pension and bought their own house and is paying tax on his earnings or pension payments should be subsidising anyone who did none of those things.  

Whereas the person who did none of that gets a pension which is topped up to the same level as someone who actually paid NI but, unlike the person who paid his NI also gets the add ons, such as housing benefit, council tax benefit, winter fuel allowance, free glasses and dental care plus whatever else is being given away (cheap broadband etc). and will probably get care payments or care paid for as well, where the person who worked for it all will have to watch it all evaporate if the time comes.

My mates wife has dementia and needs help. He is 87 and she is 84 but because they both worked and have some savings the only help they can get is around £70 a week attendance allowance which doesn't go ever so far towards the £60 a day which they have to pay for a drop in carer twice a day.

Social Services said come back when all the money has run out and we'll reappraise the situation but until then you are on your own.

They will also lose the £300 WFA as they don't get pension credit - Doesn't really seem fair does it.

Indeed, we really should be letting the poor freeze to death, after all, its their own fault really and they are of no benefit to society really.

Jesus Christ, I really despair some of the absolute !!!!!! that gets spouted online.

You read "people who have enough savings to pay for things shouldn't get given it for free" and somehow think it says "let the poor freeze to death"?

Rosie1001

MikeJXE said:

Just for comparison 

I am 83 and rent a flat at £625 a month  with state pension plus £1250 a year private, £60,000 in savings

I don't mind losing my £300 if it helps us out of this mess

My friend and partner also renting but a bungalow at £1200 a month are the same age, state pension plus huge private pensions

Savings in excess of £600,000 and £400,000 respectively 

Both moaning about the loss of their WFP

I don’t mind missing out you said if it helps …

unfortunately it’s a drop in a very big ocean …

Hit the easy targets , while big firms win in taxes , government departments waste so much money , nhs wastes a lot of money ….  Millionaires who have tax exempt status … mp’s expenses , we are paying their fuel bills and food bills etc 

put them on minimum wages or a state pension, see how they manage ! 

all  the state run services need a overhaul , I know many people on NHS who use their full sick pay as extra holidays , it’s rife.

Why can’t the pensioners who do get it and don’t want or need it have a option to opt out … 

why aren’t they targeting the alcoholics who get money per day to “ manage “ their habit , that’s over £300 a month , never mind a year ! 

I could go on , but it’s pointless , until we get a fit for purpose government who will look after the general population and not just who they want , nothing will change unfortunately