On 29/01/2018 11:31, Jethro_uk wrote:
AS I said, SWMBO cannot drive (eyesight ****ed). She is in receipt of the
benefit which provides a Motability car (plus a few thousand non-
refundable "deposit" from us)

Thousands are in that situation, including Brian who posts here.

Are you saying that they all get a motability car for the rest
of their family to benefit from ?.

A trip to Wilsons of Epsom is an eye-opener. Their forecourt
is awash with 3-year old cars, and a great many 7 seater people
carriers. All of them ex-motability, and few with an auto box.
I think this indicates an unacceptable level of abuse, just
like the infamous blue (free parking) badges.

On 29/01/2018 11:31, Jethro_uk wrote:
I take it that it was an in-depth, medically knowledgeable discussion,
where all forms of disability and their manifestation were examined ?

Or (more likely) two blokes spouting ********. Funny, I bet there was no
"balance" there.

It was fly-on-the wall documentary and the two blokes were wearing
body cams, so what we saw, was what they saw, heard and recorded.
They checked for assets and asked their office to check the car for
finance, and that was when it turned out to be a motability car,
and having jusgt had a confrontation with the 'disabled' driver,
quite rightly mused on the nature of her alledged disability.

You are beginning to sound suspiciously defensive of your and this
ladies 'entitlement'. She was not in any way physically disabled,
so why and how did she obtain a motability car ?.

If she she hadn't tried to avoid a funeral bill then she (and i suspect
thousands more like her) would simply have stayed under the radar until
someone dropped her in it to the benefits hotline.

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 11:31, Jethro_uk wrote:
I take it that it was an in-depth, medically knowledgeable discussion,
where all forms of disability and their manifestation were examined ?

Or (more likely) two blokes spouting ********. Funny, I bet there was no
"balance" there.

It was fly-on-the wall documentary and the two blokes were wearing
body cams, so what we saw, was what they saw, heard and recorded.
They checked for assets and asked their office to check the car for
finance, and that was when it turned out to be a motability car,
and having jusgt had a confrontation with the 'disabled' driver,
quite rightly mused on the nature of her alledged disability.

You are beginning to sound suspiciously defensive of your and this
ladies 'entitlement'. She was not in any way physically disabled,
so why and how did she obtain a motability car ?.

At our railway station there is a large poster - the message on it is "Not
all disabilty is visble."
For example: People, who look quite normal, can get very short of breath
when walking any significant distance. People with only one leg look quite
normal when wearing trousers. etc, etc



If she she hadn't tried to avoid a funeral bill then she (and i suspect
thousands more like her) would simply have stayed under the radar until
someone dropped her in it to the benefits hotline.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On 29/01/2018 11:51, Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 11:31, Jethro_uk wrote:
AS I said, SWMBO cannot drive (eyesight ****ed). She is in receipt of the
benefit which provides a Motability car (plus a few thousand non-
refundable "deposit" from us)

Thousands are in that situation, including Brian who posts here.

Are you saying that they all get a motability car for the rest
of their family to benefit from ?.


I think only two people can be insured.

And anyway, why not? It's a meagre compensation for a disability.

A trip to Wilsons of Epsom is an eye-opener. Their forecourt
is awash with 3-year old cars, and a great many 7 seater people
carriers. All of them ex-motability, and few with an auto box.
I think this indicates an unacceptable level of abuse, just
like the infamous blue (free parking) badges.


I'm sure we all have an anecdote or two - I certainly do. And it does
annoy me when the non-disabled driver uses the car/badge to park in
disabled spaces for themselves. Many a shouting match in my local
Waitrose car park :-)

But to my mind, there's a greater good. Even if a few thousand abuse the
system, many hundreds of thousands benefit, deservedly so.

--
Cheers, Rob

On Monday, 29 January 2018 12:20:43 UTC, RJH wrote:
On 29/01/2018 11:51, Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 11:31, Jethro_uk wrote:

AS I said, SWMBO cannot drive (eyesight ****ed). She is in receipt of the
benefit which provides a Motability car (plus a few thousand non-
refundable "deposit" from us)

Thousands are in that situation, including Brian who posts here.

Are you saying that they all get a motability car for the rest
of their family to benefit from ?.


I think only two people can be insured.

And anyway, why not? It's a meagre compensation for a disability.

A trip to Wilsons of Epsom is an eye-opener. Their forecourt
is awash with 3-year old cars, and a great many 7 seater people
carriers. All of them ex-motability, and few with an auto box.
I think this indicates an unacceptable level of abuse, just
like the infamous blue (free parking) badges.

non-sequitur of course

I'm sure we all have an anecdote or two - I certainly do. And it does
annoy me when the non-disabled driver uses the car/badge to park in
disabled spaces for themselves. Many a shouting match in my local
Waitrose car park :-)

But to my mind, there's a greater good. Even if a few thousand abuse the
system, many hundreds of thousands benefit, deservedly so.

I've seen one person who is disabled criticised for parking in a disabled bay. There's no shortage of people that think they know what they're talking about but don't.


NT

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 6:02:20 PM UTC, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 16:59:49 -0000, NY wrote:

"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 07:14:41 -0000, Jimbo
wrote:
Agreed. Plus the headlights that shouldn't be on during the day.

In my car, which is too old to have LED daylight running lights, I tend to
drive on dipped headlights on twisty country lanes, so there's a chance that
an oncoming car will see me and I will see him before we meet face-to-face,
because the headlights may be visible through gaps in walls, hedges etc.
Originally it was just bikers and Volvo drivers who did it, but now many
people realise the advantage of being seen further away.

Then you're a ****ing idiot. Anyone who can't see a moving object in broad daylight without it being covered in lights shouldn't be on the road.

You drive towards me with your lights on during the day, and you'll be met with my full beam. STOP DAZZLING ONCOMING MOTORISTS YOU ****ING IMBECILE!


If you're being dazzled in daylight by oncoming headlights, you might be suffering from cataracts or some other sort of defective vision.

On Monday, 29 January 2018 13:11:58 UTC, charles wrote:


At our railway station there is a large poster - the message on it is "Not
all disabilty is visble."
For example: People, who look quite normal, can get very short of breath
when walking any significant distance. People with only one leg look quite
normal when wearing trousers. etc, etc

Do you think you could beat jonnie peacock in a 100 metre race ?

which of you is disabled. ?

On 29/01/2018 11:31, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 10:41:59 +0000, Andrew wrote:

8


As I suspected. One rule for company car users, and an entirely separate
set of relaxed rules for motability. Unless the person on benefits
cannot drive, surely it should be restricted to 'driver only' ?.

AS I said, SWMBO cannot drive (eyesight ****ed). She is in receipt of the
benefit which provides a Motability car (plus a few thousand non-
refundable "deposit" from us)

There are plenty of motability cars that don't require any additional
upfront payments.
Its just a lease hire scheme where the mobility payment makes up
part/all of the costs.



I once watched that program on C5 when the High Court Sheriffs were
trying to recover a debt owed by a young lady to a funeral director.
Apparently ladies mother had died of cancer. She really put on the whole
drama queen entertainment, telling the debt collectors that they were
scum of the earth blah, blah, blah, that she was 'suffering'
from agrophobia and stress and on disability benefits, so had no assets.

According to lady the Sheriffs were 'picking' on her and her *wife*
because were living in a rented house (quite new) which was all funded
by housing benefit etc.

When they checked her car, it turned out to be a motability car.

They mused on camera, just what her disability was, since she had no
problems giving them the 3rd degree on the doorstep.

I take it that it was an in-depth, medically knowledgeable discussion,
where all forms of disability and their manifestation were examined ?

Or (more likely) two blokes spouting ********. Funny, I bet there was no
"balance" there. If only they'd linked it to climate change. We'd have
had to have a full panel of "views".

Some disabled people are fine for days at a time and then suffer.


A Ford garage near my fathers house in South Wales has a big sign in
their showroom advertising the motability deals they do. Apparently
that, plus PCP loans are their entire business.

For PIP/DLA recipients at the *highest* rate, it is possible to sign over
the entire mobility component to Motability as a monthly payment on a
lease car. A quick look at government data suggests a total of 157,000
people are getting this award. Or c. 0.25% of the entire population of
the UK. Eliminating that benefit with no replacement wouldn't even equal
a days worth of uncollected *due* tax from business.

You can sign over less if you go for a cheaper(1) car, however there
isn't much saving.

1: Cheaper is the cost over the lease and a cheap to buy car may cost
more than one with a better resale value. Quite often a better spec
model of a car is cheaper on motability.

The manufacturers also tend to throw in extras which make the resale
value better.



It's also worth knowing that the plural of anecdote is not data.

On 29/01/2018 11:51, Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 11:31, Jethro_uk wrote:
AS I said, SWMBO cannot drive (eyesight ****ed). She is in receipt of the
benefit which provides a Motability car (plus a few thousand non-
refundable "deposit" from us)

Thousands are in that situation, including Brian who posts here.

Are you saying that they all get a motability car for the rest
of their family to benefit from ?.

A trip to Wilsons of Epsom is an eye-opener. Their forecourt
is awash with 3-year old cars, and a great many 7 seater people
carriers. All of them ex-motability, and few with an auto box.
I think this indicates an unacceptable level of abuse, just
like the infamous blue (free parking) badges.


What's auto got to do with it?
The majority of disabled with motability cars probably can't drive them
anyway.

Maybe we should just give then twice as much every week so they can use
taxis? You don't get many taxi journeys out of ~£60 a week.
It would cost me a fortune as I have been going to the hospital 3-4
times a week for three months. Maybe they should give me a car and save
me money? Or maybe I can get patient transport. that would cost even
more for the NHS.

In article , Jethro_uk
writes
On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 12:06:32 +0000, Andrew wrote:

On 29/01/2018 11:31, Jethro_uk wrote:
I take it that it was an in-depth, medically knowledgeable discussion,
where all forms of disability and their manifestation were examined ?

Or (more likely) two blokes spouting ********. Funny, I bet there was
no "balance" there.

It was fly-on-the wall documentary and the two blokes were wearing body
cams, so what we saw, was what they saw, heard and recorded.
They checked for assets and asked their office to check the car for
finance, and that was when it turned out to be a motability car,
and having jusgt had a confrontation with the 'disabled' driver,
quite rightly mused on the nature of her alledged disability.

You are beginning to sound suspiciously defensive of your and this
ladies 'entitlement'. She was not in any way physically disabled,
so why and how did she obtain a motability car ?.

I have no idea. Just like you. You judgemental prick.

My wifes entitlement comes from filling out forms, providing copious
evidence (100 pages of scans) and a formal interview with an assessor on
behalf of the DWP.

Twice.

If she she hadn't tried to avoid a funeral bill then she (and i suspect
thousands more like her) would simply have stayed under the radar until
someone dropped her in it to the benefits hotline.

Mysteriously, an awful lot of "reports" to the authorities merely result
in confirmation that any benefits were awarded correctly.

If you want to stop looking like you have a hidden agenda, I suggest you
cast a glance over this

https://syesworldview.files.wordpres...01/image38.jpg

Benefit fraud: £1.2 billion (DWPs own figure)

Tax avoidance: £30 billion (HMRCs own figure)

There's no figure can be put on tax avoidance as it is legally not tax
due.
as it asks, where you *you* start ?

The DWP start with benefit fraud
HMRC should start with tax evasion.
--
bert

On 29/01/2018 12:18, charles wrote:
People with only one leg look quite
normal when wearing trousers. etc, etc

But does that 'entitle' them to abuse a welfare system that
was only intended to help those most in need ?.

On 29/01/2018 13:39, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 29 January 2018 13:11:58 UTC, charles wrote:


At our railway station there is a large poster - the message on it is "Not
all disabilty is visble."
For example: People, who look quite normal, can get very short of breath
when walking any significant distance. People with only one leg look quite
normal when wearing trousers. etc, etc

Do you think you could beat jonnie peacock in a 100 metre race ?

which of you is disabled. ?


One of the presenters of the Last Leg, with funny hands and
an artificial leg, has a blue badge which coincidentally
allows free parking.

But he manages to jet all around the world to the paralympics
and make it to the C4 studios every week, and is obviously not
short of money.

So he has a disability, but is he 'disabled' ?.

On 29/01/2018 13:41, Jethro_uk wrote:
Usually, when we go shopping, I take the trolley to the car, to put the
shopping in, while SWMBO looks at clothes, or other stuff.

You have a motability car and benefits because her 'eyes are f*cked'!
(your description).

If she can look at clothes, things can't be all that bad, apart
from the downside to your wallet, but then I expect the money
comes out of other peoples pockets.

Did she ever drive when her eyesight was OK ?.

On 29/01/2018 13:11, Jethro_uk wrote:
Benefit fraud: £1.2 billion (DWPs own figure)

Which everyone knows is DETECTED fraud, usually as a result
of someone phoning the hotline, and not because the DWP and
all the other useless penpushers have done their job properly.

The real figure could well be many times that amount, and
probably is, if you are a typical example of the Britains
endemic 'entitlement' culture. Are you claiming all these
benefits because you actually *need* them, or simply because there
is a juicy loophole and you can ?. If so you are no better than
our MPs and local councillors who grab every penny they can.

Are you now saying that Benefit fraud is socially and economically
acceptable while (much exagerated) tax fraud is not ?. Trying to
justify your position based on nonsense figures from the Grundian
and the Inde, (all the usual suspects) won't help.

The so-called tax fraud amounts that Grady, Corbyn and that lot
regularly bandy about have been done to death by numerous commentators
on the TV and radio and the figures are wildly exagerated.

I once met a couple of not-very-old people at an RSPB cafe who were
enjoying their retirement with their two gold-plated public service
pensions. He was ex-fire chief retired well before 60, and she was
a teacher, and very clearly left-wing and made the mistake of mentioning
the original £120 Billion 'tax evasion', and then threw in all the names
of the Coffee shops. 'Starbucks, Costa, ..' I stoppped her at that point
and asked if she knew who Costa were ?. 'Oh its one of those multi-
nationals who send their profits abroad'.

Except that Costa are wholly owned by Whitbread PLC, who employ a lot
of people in Costa, Premier Inns, and other leasure outlets and pay
all their NI and corporation tax in the UK. This didn't cut the mustard
with ex-teacher, she just carried on banging on and on about all those
dreadful tax-evaders.

On 29/01/2018 13:46, dennis@home wrote:
Some disabled people are fine for days at a time and then suffer.

Translation:

When being observed or assessed they 'suffer', but the rest of the
time they are fine.

On 29/01/2018 15:00, Jethro_uk wrote:
It's incredibly annoying that the single most useful "adaptation" - an
automatic gearbox - isn't the baseline spec for*all* motability cars.

You are claiming benefits based on your wifes apparently poor eyesight
and have been since 1999, that's 19 years. Can we assume that she
doesn't work, and has no need to be ferried to and from home ?

In what way would a lack of auto-box 'annoy' her, if she isn't
doing the driving ?.

Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 15:00, Jethro_uk wrote:


You are claiming benefits based on your wifes apparently poor eyesight
and have been since 1999, that's 19 years.


Where did he say that?

He said she could not drive because of poor eyesight, the car is more
likely to have been granted for other conditions he has not given details
off.

Looks like you are disabled yourself in the comprehension department.

GH

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
One of the presenters of the Last Leg, with funny hands and
an artificial leg, has a blue badge which coincidentally
allows free parking.

But he manages to jet all around the world to the paralympics
and make it to the C4 studios every week, and is obviously not
short of money.

Meaning a disabled parking permit should only be available to the poor?
That would cure the problem since they probably couldn't afford a car.

So he has a disability, but is he 'disabled' ?.

Would you be willing to trade a leg for a disabled parking permit?

--
*Avoid clichés like the plague. (They're old hat.) *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thursday, 1 February 2018 14:33:42 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
One of the presenters of the Last Leg, with funny hands and
an artificial leg, has a blue badge which coincidentally
allows free parking.

But he manages to jet all around the world to the paralympics
and make it to the C4 studios every week, and is obviously not
short of money.

Meaning a disabled parking permit should only be available to the poor?

I thought they were availble to those that are disabled, or at least that's who they should be aimed at.


That would cure the problem since they probably couldn't afford a car.

Or you could insist they hand in their application forms at an office on a mountain top somewhere.


So he has a disability, but is he 'disabled' ?.

Would you be willing to trade a leg for a disabled parking permit?

Bit of an unfair question, would anyone with one false leg settle for a closer parking space if they gave up their remaining working leg ?

I'm not sure how disabled badges indicate how disabled a person is, but I would assume that someone with no arms and no legs would get a higher disability rating than someone with just one disabled leg, and the fact that they can win an olypmic running meddle shou,d mean that their disabled spot could be located in the same area as anyone else that has never won an omlypic medal for running.

On 01/02/18 11:45, Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 13:46, dennis@home wrote:
Some disabled people are fine for days at a time and then suffer.

Translation:

When being observed or assessed they 'suffer', but the rest of the
time they are fine.

Before my first heart op, I could barely walk 60 metres
Before my second, I could barely walk 5 metres.
Before my third, I was back down to 60 meters.

Now, as long as I take the pills and dont drink too much coffee I can
walk indefinitely. On good days. Sometiems I am pushed to do 60 meters
without stopping.

Disability does indeed vary greatly day to day.

Oh, and I havent got a blue card nor do I intend to get one.

I need the exercise.



--
"I am inclined to tell the truth and dislike people who lie consistently.
This makes me unfit for the company of people of a Left persuasion, and
all women"

On Thursday, 1 February 2018 15:07:06 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/02/18 11:45, Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 13:46, dennis@home wrote:
Some disabled people are fine for days at a time and then suffer.

Translation:

When being observed or assessed they 'suffer', but the rest of the
time they are fine.

Before my first heart op, I could barely walk 60 metres
Before my second, I could barely walk 5 metres.
Before my third, I was back down to 60 meters.

Back down or back up to 60 AVOs ;-)


Now, as long as I take the pills and dont drink too much coffee I can
walk indefinitely. On good days. Sometiems I am pushed to do 60 meters
without stopping.

Wow but then again jonnie peacock can run 100 metres in under 11 seconds and he has a leg missing.

SO who should get the disabled badge and what should it mean ?


Disability does indeed vary greatly day to day.

That would cause a problem for administration too.


Oh, and I havent got a blue card nor do I intend to get one.

I need the exercise.

Most people do. :-(

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 13:46, dennis@home wrote:
Some disabled people are fine for days at a time and then suffer.

Translation:

When being observed or assessed they 'suffer', but the rest of the
time they are fine.

err . NO

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 1 February 2018 14:33:42 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Andrew
wrote:
One of the presenters of the Last Leg, with funny hands and an
artificial leg, has a blue badge which coincidentally allows free
parking.

But he manages to jet all around the world to the paralympics and
make it to the C4 studios every week, and is obviously not short of
money.

Meaning a disabled parking permit should only be available to the poor?

I thought they were availble to those that are disabled, or at least
that's who they should be aimed at.

They are, but it can be applied to the vehicle in which they are being
driven.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On 01/02/2018 14:32, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
One of the presenters of the Last Leg, with funny hands and
an artificial leg, has a blue badge which coincidentally
allows free parking.

But he manages to jet all around the world to the paralympics
and make it to the C4 studios every week, and is obviously not
short of money.

Meaning a disabled parking permit should only be available to the poor?
That would cure the problem since they probably couldn't afford a car.

You need to get the PIP enhanced mobility benefit to get a blue badge AFAIK.
Then the car is "free".
They might even pay for driving lessons if they can't afford them.
If they are really poor they might want to use the cash for something else.


https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/s...anuary2018.pdf

On 01/02/2018 11:45, Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 13:46, dennis@home wrote:
Some disabled people are fine for days at a time and then suffer.

Translation:

When being observed or assessed they 'suffer', but the rest of the
time they are fine.

No. My mother-in-law suffered from osteoporosis - to the extent that she
twice suffered spontaneous fratures of her spine. She was constantly in
pain.

After injections to her spine, she was great and could walk to the shops
and carry bags back, but she needed injections every 6 months and the
NHS would not let her book her next appointment until 6 months elapsed -
and then there was a 3 month waiting list. Each time, as she was getting
towards 9 months, she'd be absolutely crippled and hardly able to move.

I myself am not registered disabled, but some days I can walk half a
mile or stand for half an hour on the train and then, in reaction, the
following day I can hobble to or from the car and that's it!

SteveW

On 01/02/2018 15:04, whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 1 February 2018 14:33:42 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
One of the presenters of the Last Leg, with funny hands and
an artificial leg, has a blue badge which coincidentally
allows free parking.

But he manages to jet all around the world to the paralympics
and make it to the C4 studios every week, and is obviously not
short of money.

Meaning a disabled parking permit should only be available to the poor?

I thought they were availble to those that are disabled, or at least that's who they should be aimed at.


That would cure the problem since they probably couldn't afford a car.

Or you could insist they hand in their application forms at an office on a mountain top somewhere.


So he has a disability, but is he 'disabled' ?.

Would you be willing to trade a leg for a disabled parking permit?

Bit of an unfair question, would anyone with one false leg settle for a closer parking space if they gave up their remaining working leg ?

I'm not sure how disabled badges indicate how disabled a person is, but I would assume that someone with no arms and no legs would get a higher disability rating than someone with just one disabled leg, and the fact that they can win an olypmic running meddle shou,d mean that their disabled spot could be located in the same area as anyone else that has never won an omlypic medal for running.

Disabilities are indeed graded and affect whether someone is expected to
work and how much benefit they get to cope with the increased costs of
their disability (extra tansport costs, extra heating requirements, etc.)

The blue badge is not graded. You can only get one if you cannot walk
more than 50 metres without significant effort, pain, breathlessness;
need support equipment that requires extra space around the car to get
it in and out; are a driver rather than passenger by have problems with
your arms and cannot use a parking meter; are registered blind; along
with another group that have non-physical problems such as debilitating
anxiety outdoors - this is not an exhaustive list, just the most obvious
ones.

SteveW

On 01/02/2018 20:16, Steve Walker wrote:
On 01/02/2018 15:04, whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 1 February 2018 14:33:42 UTC, Dave Plowman (News)Â* wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Andrew wrote:
One of the presenters of the Last Leg, with funny hands and
an artificial leg, has a blue badge which coincidentally
allows free parking.

But he manages to jet all around the world to the paralympics
and make it to the C4 studios every week, and is obviously not
short of money.

Meaning a disabled parking permit should only be available to the poor?

I thought they were availble to those that are disabled, or at least
that's who they should be aimed at.


That would cure the problem since they probably couldn't afford a car.

Or you could insist they hand in their application forms at an office
on a mountain top somewhere.

So he has a disability, but is he 'disabled' ?.

Would you be willing to trade a leg for a disabled parking permit?

Bit of an unfair question, would anyone with one false leg settle for
a closer parking space if they gave up their remaining working leg ?

I'm not sure how disabled badges indicate how disabled a person is,
but I would assume that someone with no arms and no legs would get a
higher disability rating than someone with just one disabled leg, and
the fact that they can win an olypmic running meddle shou,d mean that
their disabled spot could be located in the same area as anyone else
that has never won an omlypic medal for running.

Disabilities are indeed graded and affect whether someone is expected to
work and how much benefit they get to cope with the increased costs of
their disability (extra tansport costs, extra heating requirements, etc.)

The blue badge is not graded. You can only get one if you cannot walk
more than 50 metres without significant effort, pain, breathlessness;
need support equipment that requires extra space around the car to get
it in and out; are a driver rather than passenger by have problems with
your arms and cannot use a parking meter; are registered blind; along
with another group that have non-physical problems such as debilitating
anxiety outdoors - this is not an exhaustive list, just the most obvious
ones.

SteveW

I bet none of the complainers would not claim when they are issued a
DS1500 and McMillan call to fill in the forms!

On Thursday, 1 February 2018 15:07:06 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/02/18 11:45, Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 13:46, dennis@home wrote:

Some disabled people are fine for days at a time and then suffer.

Translation:

When being observed or assessed they 'suffer', but the rest of the
time they are fine.

Before my first heart op, I could barely walk 60 metres
Before my second, I could barely walk 5 metres.
Before my third, I was back down to 60 meters.

Now, as long as I take the pills and dont drink too much coffee I can
walk indefinitely. On good days. Sometiems I am pushed to do 60 meters
without stopping.

Disability does indeed vary greatly day to day.

Oh, and I havent got a blue card nor do I intend to get one.

I need the exercise.

the sort of crass foolishness that Andrew demonstrates with that comment has spread throughout our society, resulting in a whole lot of stupid decisions that are good for no-one. Unfortunately such stupidity became positively fashionable in the 1960s and has yet to fall out of favour.

On Thursday, 1 February 2018 11:43:48 UTC, Andrew wrote:

endemic 'entitlement' culture. Are you claiming all these
benefits because you actually *need* them, or simply because there
is a juicy loophole and you can ?.

I'm not aware of any loopholes built in to the disability benefits claim system. Quite the reverse, many that should get such payments don't.


NT

On 01/02/2018 11:45, Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 13:46, dennis@home wrote:
Some disabled people are fine for days at a time and then suffer.

Translation:

When being observed or assessed they 'suffer', but the rest of the
time they are fine.

Not always. MS, for example, comes in waves.

Whether they should be entitled to a blue badge when fit is another
question...

Andy

"Vir Campestris" wrote in message
news
On 01/02/2018 11:45, Andrew wrote:
On 29/01/2018 13:46, dennis@home wrote:
Some disabled people are fine for days at a time and then suffer.

Translation:

When being observed or assessed they 'suffer', but the rest of the
time they are fine.

Not always. MS, for example, comes in waves.

Whether they should be entitled to a blue badge when fit is another
question...

I'm sure most disabled people would love to be able to throw away their blue
badge and be able to walk again.

You could rely on people's honesty: that people whose disability comes in
waves will only use their blue badge on a bad day. I wonder what proportion
of people would be that honest, and what proportion would abuse it.

I remember giving a lift to a guy with brittle bone disease who is entitled
to a blue badge. We needed to park somewhere so he directed me to a disabled
space and displayed his blue badge in my car windscreen. As soon as I got
out of the car to get my friend's wheelchair out of the boot, a traffic
warden pounced on me and said "you're not disabled". It gave me great
pleasure to be able to point to the wheelchair and to my friend, and say
"No, but *he* is". With very bad grace, the traffic warden mumbled an
apology and walked away, looking as if I'd offended her.

For the record, my friend says he usually tries to not to park where it's
otherwise illegal (double yellow lines etc), and only uses disabled spaces
for the extra width to get his wheelchair alongside the car: he still pays
the normal fee even though he's entitled to a discount.

In article ,
NY wrote:
For the record, my friend says he usually tries to not to park where
it's otherwise illegal (double yellow lines etc), and only uses
disabled spaces for the extra width to get his wheelchair alongside the
car: he still pays the normal fee even though he's entitled to a
discount.

It's rather funny the way so many complain of disabled parking spaces in a
supermarket car park not being fully used. Or the possibility of someone
using one who perhaps doesn't really need it 100%.

Even at my vast age, I park at the far end of the carpark to leave the
spaces near the entrance free for those youngsters who have seems to have
problems walking a few hundred yards. And like to fight over the closest
space. Perhaps they drive the short distance to the gym too.

--
*I did a theatrical performance about puns. It was a play on words.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 25/01/18 08:05, harry wrote:

Harry! Darren Osborne is doing life and the papers are crying out for
action against the right wing internet bull****ters who wound him up
into such a state of hatred. When the law have picked through his
internet history, if they find he ever browsed ukdiy, you will be doing
time with him. They will go for the small time creeps like you of
course, not the journalists at the Mail and the Express.

Best keep a low profile, no? Or why not **** forever?

TW

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 25/01/18 08:05, harry wrote:

Harry! Darren Osborne is doing life and the papers are crying out for
action against the right wing internet bull****ters who wound him up
into such a state of hatred. When the law have picked through his
internet history, if they find he ever browsed ukdiy, you will be doing
time with him. They will go for the small time creeps like you of
course, not the journalists at the Mail and the Express.

Best keep a low profile, no? Or why not **** forever?

It's very sad that someone can be influenced by hatred posted on the
internet to the point of killing. Not the sort of thing you'd expect of
anyone with a UK education and half a brain cell still working. But as an
alcoholic, his brain had likely stopped functioning normally.

--
*(on a baby-size shirt) "Party -- my crib -- two a.m

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.