Seven medals but now they want my benefits.

[carernotasaint]

blacktrianglecampaign.org/2012/08/28/seven-medals-but-now-the-tories-want-my-benefits-british-paralympic-gold-medalist-tara-flood-speaks-out/

Yes I do knew they are paid for out of everyone taxes.

What I meant was that noone is saying we should withdraw all support for all disabled people. What needs to be done is to accept we cannot support everyone, work out what we can afford to spend and target those most in need. You are right, I should be more accurate in what i say.

(speaks slowly) lots of disabled people work and pay taxes.
DLA IS NOT AN OUT OF WORK BENEFIT

Novack Motability cars are not "paid for out of everyone's taxes." The motability scheme is run by a charity. Motability is a charity.

Higher rate mobility is paid for "out of everyone's taxes". (including mine)

Perhaps that's what you meant? You're not sounding very educated tbh.

The books do need to be balanced victimising the sick and disabled is not the way to do it, we need to close tax loop holes first

Richard Littledick in the Mail says cripples are always getting 7 series Beemers on benefits.

Is that not true?

The cars are paid for from taxes, The organisation may be run as charity but the payment for the car comes out of taxes

The organisation itself fits GPS trackers to it's vehicle as it suspects fraud and uses them to check up on fraud

gooooooollllllllllllll

So there we go. Novack offers no evidence at all for "Those who genuinely cannot work are not loosing their allowances."

For evidence of the contrary, I can add myself to those giving testimony above. I've had IB/ESA stopped twice now.

Each time I have had to fight for it to be restored but never needed additional evidence. They restored it on what they already knew when I challenged them hard enough (which was exhausting and itself deleterious to my health), but took three months to do it.

For those who prefer more verifiable evidence,

"Disabled 'wrongly denied' benefit, Citizens Advice says"
"Charity chief quits over fit-for-work test"

And self-evidently if over 40% of appeals are being won, those are people who cannot work who lost their benefits. But only got them after going through a protracted appeals procedure - which iiuc the DWP now no longer has a time-limit for completing.

doh leave out the last line that was for a text. mumsnet and the Real, Barça does not mix

But like I say, I don't take anything Novack says on any thread on any board as an honestly held opinion.

She's just useful for parading myths to be shot down. Which thought I hope warms the cockles of her little heart.

I'm really shocked at the ignorance and lack of empathy from some members. I am disabled. I work. I pay tax. I receive DLA. I have a motability vehicle (God forbid). I will be reassessed which I have no problem with, if it is a fair assessment. I do have a problem with being perceived as some scrounger because I am unfortunate enough to have heart and lung disease (from childhood) as well as other issues that I won't bore you with. The original post from the OP was a bit "pointless" but raises valid points and information which is important to bring to the publics attention. The Gov'nt and media have done a stand up job at convincing the public that this recession can be fixed if all the benefit "scroungers" are dealt with. Be intelligent enough not to by in to their B.S for God's sake check your ignorance and count your blessings that you and your loved ones aren't struggling to stand/walk/breathe.

No one on this thread has been against anyone like you hugglebug and as you say you have no problem with being assessed.

The problem is those who see being assessed as an outrage when it is there to ensure the right money goes to those who deserve it. This is just being painted by labour loon as anti benefits when it is about identifying those who need it with the limited pot and helping those who can work get back into work. The cuts labour planned are almost exactly as the conservatives have introduced and Ed Milliband as presented no coherent policy at all on this matter.

Novack have you overdosed on the Daily Mail?

I can't believe there are many on mumsnet stupid enough to believe her/his posts but this wiki summary on motability is pretty good. Note why it was set up.

I don't take the daily fail and if you had read anything on here I am pretty scathing of the fail if I ever mention it along with most UK tabloids.

the atos assesment does need a complete re-think i agree 100% with that

but are you saying that all people who recieve IB/ESA/DLA etc should not be assesed and they are ALL incapable of work forever, or to check things havent changed in their condition better or worse

do some peoples condition improve through,new drugs,operations,therapy do they all notify IF their condition improved?

because thats what it sounds like though im sure your not

i predicted a bun fight and as always it happens,never on mn have i seen a thread regarding these subjects NOT go this way

The point is that the re-assessment seems inherently floored and unfair Novak and that I do have a problem with. The criteria for the new assessment is completely floored and has been lambasted by several Dr's as well as disability rights groups. The point isn't so much that people object to reassessment, I have already undergone reassessment twice while on DLA by a qualified Dr who also used reports from my consultants and didn't work for a private company with targets to deliver.

So the cars are paid for out of taxation even on your wikipedia article which incidently is only rated 3 out of 5 as trustworthy.

if we post telling someone that they are a idiot and are trying to shit stir is that a PA?

niceguy can you explain how any of the Work Programme schemes help the economy and the taxpayer?

It would be nice if you could further explain how you would expand the economy rather than saying we can't afford to support people which is a concept I find not just repellent but economically incontinent.

Sorry to single you out because I've asked a number of similarly-minded people to explain their viewpoints but they keep dodging it.

So I'm asking you what your justification is based on valid economic theory and experience.

Otherwise I won't be able to take you seriously and I'll have to keep saying that every time I see you post on these threads.

Oh dear, do I have to do it again already?

"Motability has started to fit a limited number of location trackers to applications for new cars where the risk of potential misuse is highest, for example customers who permanently live in a care home and have a number of drivers who have access to the car.

"We expect to fit location trackers in fewer than five percent of the more than 600,000 cars leased through Motability." (Use of your car)

So, no wide suspicion of fraud.
Where there is suspicion, it's not of fraudulent acquisition of a car but of other people taking advantage.
And Motability take anti-fraud measures so that, oh, they can prevent fraud from actually happening.

We can all sleep soundly in our beds.

socknicking Sorry. I'm going to stop playing Murder In the Dark right now.