Your Letters - November 2010

More to disability than meets the eye

Regarding Alan Bernstone’s letter in Your Views (“Has the Government really thought out its cuts?”, Disability Now, October 2010), I too am in very severe pain, with very bad flare-ups. On the odd days when the pain has subsided, people seem to think “Oh, he's OK” because, as Mr Bernstone states, the pain is internal and can't be seen.

Back in 1996 I had the misfortune to be reported as not being as ill as I am, and had my Disability Living Allowance (DLA) stopped. The next year was the worst of my life.

As I had been off work since 1990 because of my illness, I had very little money and could not afford a car to get around so I was housebound. I managed to get help from a charity that supplied me with a barrister, and after a year of hell I had to go before a medical board. After only five minutes in the room with them, I had my DLA reinstated “indefinit­ely” (whatever that means), as well as getting all the money I should have received the previous year.

I hope no one else has to go through what I went through, because of the Government getting the proposed changes wrong. Good luck to all disabled people, now and always.
H. Barker, by email

I’m writing to support the letter by Alan Bernstone. I suffer in the same way he does, but I also have other health issues that stop me from working. When you’re in constant pain, suffering from fatigue, and diabetic as well, there’s nothing much going for you. That’s why we have to keep going, which is hard when your health isn’t at its best. Healthy people simply don’t understand the problems we have on a daily basis.
Mrs E Stebbings, Hull

I have been reading the article “Assessors not fit for tougher benefit tests” (Disability Now, October 2010). I’ve been disabled since I injured my back at work in July 2002. At the time I was assessed, passed, and given benefits.

I was sent for another assessment in June 2008. I was examined and checked for ten minutes. The doctor then spent 15 minutes typing up his notes. I waited for the results and two weeks later got a letter from the benefits office telling me I had failed to stay qualified. I was given a P45 and my benefits were stopped.

I appealed and won, but the stress of having no money while the appeal went through has made my health deteriorate further, and I’m dreading going through all this again.

The benefits office doesn’t think it has done anything wrong but if it hadn’t cut my benefits, my health wouldn’t be so bad. My solicitor reckoned that by the points system, I had 43 points, yet according to the assessor I had zero. A big difference, don’t you feel?

I wonder how many others there are who have been put through this, and how much the Government pays assessors to get people off benefits. It obviously wants to get people taken off Incapacity Benefit and put onto Job Seekers Allowance.

Can’t we do something about these assessments, to stop people suffering? These assessors make me very angry. The cuts are only going to make us, the most vulnerable, suffer more. Results should be checked and appeals allowed time to ensure that assessments are correct.
David J Wolsey, Mitcham, Surrey


Use them or lose them – but please don’t tax them

It’s disappointing that Emma Bowler’s positive article on improved accessibility of buses (“On the buses”, Disability Now, July 2010) should be followed by so much negativity in your correspondence columns.

Many disabled people have campaigned bravely over the years for access to public transport, and hundreds of millions have been invested in accessible vehicles. Some 60 per cent of buses are now accessible to the majority of disabled people: disabled people have to start using them.

Doing so will show the bus companies that their investment in vehicles and staff training was well spent. It will also give drivers more experience in using ramps and kneeling suspensions properly. And passengers will appreciate why such features have been added.

Problems undoubtedly remain, particularly in rural areas, but we’re not going to encourage more investment  if our reaction to improvements is always so black.

I make a point of using public transport whenever I can. I travel round London by bus on my regular visits to the capital. My journeys are usually incident-free. As I get more confident, and as staff and other passengers get more understanding, problems arise less often. I urge other disabled people to follow Emma’s lead, find out more about the accessibility of services in their area, and if suitable to your needs, give them a try.
Will Bee, Westbury on Trym, Bristol

With reference to Helen Dolphin’s article “The case for a fuel rebate” (Disability Now, June 2010) may I say that while some cars will do 30 or 40 miles to the gallon, my adapted commercial vehicle only does 18 or 19, so that a 24-mile round trip to my local hospital costs me a tenner. Taxis aren’t an option as there are no accessible taxis where I live in North Wales.

When VAT goes up to 20 per cent, this will hit us hard. I’d like to see research into how many people will be affected and I’d like to see a VAT exemption policy like the one in Ireland where disabled drivers are entitled to 600 gallons VAT free per year. You can read about the Irish policy at www.citizensinformation.ie.
Daniel O’Neill, Anglesey


Memo to MPs: cut your own costs or leave us alone

Regarding proposals to scrap the Independent Living Fund (ILF), ILF does what it says on the tin. It lets people have as near normal lives and human rights as is possible, but there’s no national standardised independent assessment for care need.

As a result, the postcode lottery goes unchecked. Some authorities spend 70 per cent, and others only 30 per cent, on adult social care needs. Most now flatly refuse to “assess” correctly basic human needs, such as essential night or day help.

They force people who live alone to go and live in a hospital or nursing home, leaving the NHS to pick up some or all of the cost. This is more expensive to the public purse, but local authorities don’t worry as long as it’s not a charge on their social services budget.

If politicians want the country to reduce costs by 40 per cent, why don’t they take a lead by reducing their own costs by 40 per cent, including pensions, perks and office costs?
Michelle Doyle, by email