AIBU to question no hosepipe ban exemption for people on benefits?

[Crosorbled]

No hosepipe ban for people on benefits .

I am exempt because my son has hydrotherapy at home. It would be too big a job for them to call everyone on the tariff to assess their specific disability. I live in a flat so don't even have a hosepipe, though.

Good example of what the exemption was intended for.

Interesting. So nothing to do with the government and from that article it’s only Southern Water that has said it’s for larger families claiming benefits (who could also be working) on their special tariff.

Other water companies apply the exemption to households with someone who is registered as having a medical exemption.

Affinity Water, the second of the two firms imposing the bans, said in an email to customers this week that those on its 'Priority Services Register' and 'WaterSure tariff' scheme, alongside Blue Badge holders, "are exempt from the ban".

Meanwhile, four other water companies are also allowing exemptions only for Blue Badge holders

So not quite holding up the rage-baiting post is it?

Please learn to read the thread before frothing indignantly. It has been stated repeatedly that this is nothing to do with the government. Not this government. Not the previous government. These hose bans and any exemptions are the decision of the water companies. I believe two of them have imposed these bans and offered exemptions. They are privately owned and not controlled by the government. This has been the case since 1989 in England and Wales.

Exactly, we don't need people getting wound up and using water for the sake of when it's only two of many water companies that even have these exemptions.

I don’t know why people respond to this journalistic divisive rage bait 🙄

I am not one of those people, but I do think people use MN as an outlet for a bit of a rant. Nothing like an anonymous forum to get rid of a bit of tension!

But why does this allow you to use a hosepipe?

It helps if the headline reinforces their prejudices of course. If it was 'People On Benefits Found To Be Genuinely In Need In The Great Majority Of Cases' then they'd say it was rubbish and made up even if the article made clear in paragraph one that there was irrefutable evidence for it.

I would have a go at making some shit up myself for fun - 'People On Benefits To Be Allowed To Jump Queues At Dartford Crossing'; 'People On Benefits To Get Free Top Hats'; 'People On Benefits Have Webbed Feet', but the trouble is some moron will always actually believe it.

It doesn't.

The ,OP for whatever reason , is blaming the most powerless people in society for our ills.

Who the fuck whines about pensioners, the disabled and poorer children, getting the water they need?🤯🤯🤯

Or "Benefit Claimants Live Better Lifestyles And Have More Money Than Working People", and the headline will have a photo with if it of someone on a mobility scooter in Waitrose.

This doesn’t answer why the need is there for the group listed.

Why do the poorer dc need a hosepipe though more than any other dc?

i understand elderly and disabled

But, apparently, it does!

There's another thread where someone is filling their paddling pool - because they can.

It is just a blanket thing... like the Winter Fuel payment was. Easier to to cover more people than muck about and wasting time and money on the finer details about who is more eligible.

I am not sure my water supplier even knows I am on benefits. I am not eligible for WaterSure anyway as my bill is way under their cap.

Look at the criteria for exemption.

What exactly is your problem with them?

On this thread there are numerous posters using hosepipes and filling pools because they can and they want to.🙄

I think the reason why is because disabled people may not be able to go out or get out easily by themselves. Therefore, children are able to partake in activities which they may not otherwise get a chance too. Also, disabled people can find enjoyment in their garden as they cannot access parks/days out. just a quick couple of reason's why.

It is the same on the other thread about hosepipe bans. People ignoring it because of leaks and what the higher ups of water companies earn.

Water is a finite resource. And yes, people go on about how it falls from the sky and should be free. Ok, just use that then. No water to your taps, or your waste water being taken away.

Is water a finite resource @XenoBitch ? Do you really mean that? Or do you mean that clean, drinkable water is a finite resource?

Do you not that think that people should question the decades of mismanagement that have led to a damp country with plenty of rainfall each year not being able to manage 30 days of no rainfall after a particularly wet winter?

I'm all for personal responsibility and using our resources wisely. As I said above, I have been showering standing inside a big tub, so that I can reuse my shower water in the garden. I use the washing up bowl water to do the same. I'd love to see far, far, far greater reuse of grey water in this country. I'd like to see the introduction of novel household, agricultural and industrial schemes to reuse water, rather than it all go into the overstretched drains and sewerage systems again.

What is so deeply depressing is that our media and quite a few posters on this thread would rather take chunks out of each other arguing about who is more worthy of turning on their hosepipe, than actually consider why the bans are being imposed upon them in the first place.

Sorry, yes I meant clean treated water.

Like another poster said some water companies are just using water sure as a group to go they are exempt.

Other water companies are being stricter. so mine is priory service not just water sure.

However water companies have pretty much never fined anyone even if someone reported you the first step would just be a hey did you know you’re not meant to be using a hose pipe ok?

It would take multiple reported breaches for someone to actually get fined. So most people ignore it.

Also the poorest are least likely to pay the fine since well they are poor so another reason some colonies just lump all those on the fixed cheaper tariff together.

My point was that talking about people with children under five "on benefits of course" in a faintly sneery way is misleading since the majority of people with young children are "on benefits".

Problem is, not all disabled people qualify for watersure. It’s linked to means tested benefits, which not everyone disabled can claim.

Again it varies by water company.

Mine is watersure for lower capped bills and separately priority register. However you can be on both. Priority is for disabled or those with babies off the top of my head.

Our area only priority is exempt. In others priority and watersure are exempt so in theory all disabled people who have made sure they have alerted their water companies should be exempt.