Severely disabled man lost home due to bedroom tax now has bath in paddling pool

gregrichardsgregrichards Posts: 4,913
Forum Member
✭✭✭
"This shocking picture exposes the brutal reality of David Cameron’s Bedroom Tax – a severely disabled man forced to bathe in a paddling pool in his living room.

The Sunday People is today publishing the photograph at the request of the family of Rob Tomlinson after he was driven out of his specially adapted home by the hated Tory tax.

For years Rob, 48, happily used a purpose-built walk-in shower at a four-bedroom house specially converted for him and his caring *relatives by the local council.

But after Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith imposed the Bedroom Tax, Rob’s family fell into debt as they struggled to pay the cost of being penalised for two spare rooms."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brutality-bedroom-tax-exposed-disgraceful-6302099

This is absolutely disgusting David Cameron and Ian Duncan Smith should hang their heads in shame. What has happened to this country when vulnerable disabled people are forced to life like this?
«134

Comments

  • Keyser_Soze1Keyser_Soze1 Posts: 25,182
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    "This shocking picture exposes the brutal reality of David Cameron’s Bedroom Tax – a severely disabled man forced to bathe in a paddling pool in his living room.

    The Sunday People is today publishing the photograph at the request of the family of Rob Tomlinson after he was driven out of his specially adapted home by the hated Tory tax.

    For years Rob, 48, happily used a purpose-built walk-in shower at a four-bedroom house specially converted for him and his caring *relatives by the local council.

    But after Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith imposed the Bedroom Tax, Rob’s family fell into debt as they struggled to pay the cost of being penalised for two spare rooms."

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brutality-bedroom-tax-exposed-disgraceful-6302099

    This is absolutely disgusting David Cameron and Ian Duncan Smith should hang their heads in shame. What has happened to this country when vulnerable disabled people are forced to life like this?

    Functional psychopaths do not feel shame.
  • talentedmonkeytalentedmonkey Posts: 2,639
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Cameron and his Government are evil Cameron claims to be a Christian, but the fruit he bears is not good fruit, it is vile and putrid. They are deliberately targeting the poor and vulnerable because they are easy targets and can not fight back.

    This bedroom tax is not a tax, it is a reduction of benefits, called the bedroom subsidy. I was also hit by this, but was determined to get a job, I now pay full rent, but have no penalties imposed for my extra bedroom.

    I have also been sanctioned because I did not fill in my Universal Job Match properly for one week. The government have also claimed I was not entilted Working Family Tax Credits for one tax year, the start of which was when my daughter was in first year of college. They did not tell me why they wanted the £3000 back, I appealed and lost, but the strange thing was this was from 3 tax years ago, the tax claim was fine for the tax years either side. I told them I would pay this back at £10 a month, or take me to court, as there was proberbly some stupid legal loop hole for that year, or I forgot to dot an I or something stupid.

    In short I hate this government, it is times like this when you think it would be good if we had a revolution and the people took over.
  • gregrichardsgregrichards Posts: 4,913
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I just hope somebody starts a just giving page for this man or someone steps into help it is very distressing that people need to suffer like this through no fault of their own. People need to kick up h£ll about what has happened to this man. I am ashamed to be a member of this country.
  • Misanthropy_83Misanthropy_83 Posts: 2,561
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The conservatives are c**ts
  • MAWMAW Posts: 38,777
    Forum Member
    On the plus side, i daresay a family of 5 or more now has a house to suit their needs, as opposed to them squeezing into a 2 bed flat. The question is, who is the most needy, the most deserving? Sure, ideally we'd build a bunch more 4 bed houses. Lets have a whip round, put in a grand each. Who's first?
  • BerBer Posts: 24,562
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MAW wrote: »
    On the plus side, i daresay a family of 5 or more now has a house to suit their needs, as opposed to them squeezing into a 2 bed flat. The question is, who is the most needy, the most deserving? Sure, ideally we'd build a bunch more 4 bed houses. Lets have a whip round, put in a grand each. Who's first?

    Nope, it has been taken over by an elderly couple who are except from paying the bedroom tax. So taking into account all the money the council had spent adapting the home for this chaps needs, and that it is still 'under-occupied', its a win all round...
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 35
    Forum Member
    When it comes to the conservatives the term 'Im alright jack' comes to mind.
    I feel so upset and outraged by this.
    Just disgraceful.

    'There but for the grace of God go I' Cameron and Smith.
  • Babe RainbowBabe Rainbow Posts: 34,349
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If this story is entirely true then it is appalling. As a general thing, where fit and healthy tenants are concerned, I don't disagree with the bedroom tax. But there should be exemptions and this is surely one of them.

    But if the council paid £70k for adaptations to the original house, surely they now have to do the same thing wherever the family are living now. Where is the economic logic in having to do that ?
  • MAWMAW Posts: 38,777
    Forum Member
    Ber wrote: »
    Nope, it has been taken over by an elderly couple who are except from paying the bedroom tax. So taking into account all the money the council had spent adapting the home for this chaps needs, and that it is still 'under-occupied', its a win all round...

    In that case, its probably not benefits sanctions that are wrong, but some complete tossers in the housing department.
  • DotheboyshallDotheboyshall Posts: 40,583
    Forum Member
    Anyone with a modicum of intelligence would have realised things like this would happen.

    So either the government is stupid or it doesn't care about cases like this (or both).

    How much would it "cost" to allow for exemptions in cases like this?
  • bluebladeblueblade Posts: 88,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Something I don't get here.
    And in a final insult, their old home is now occupied by an elderly couple who are exempt from the tax while Rob and his family have been forced to move THREE times.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Why are they exempt?
    Gary said: “At first I thought it wouldn’t affect us because the house had been specially built for Rob’s needs. Plus where else could they put us that was suitable?” They filled in forms asking for “discretionary measures for people with special requirements” but were shocked when they were turned down.

    When a severely disabled person isn't?

    This is a manifest and totally indefensible injustice, and Cameron should personally be called out on it. Utter disgrace.
  • DotheboyshallDotheboyshall Posts: 40,583
    Forum Member
    blueblade wrote: »
    Why are they exempt?
    When a severely disabled person isn't?
    Pensioners tend to vote Tory
    Severely disabled people don't.
  • DotheboyshallDotheboyshall Posts: 40,583
    Forum Member
    MAW wrote: »
    In that case, its probably not benefits sanctions that are wrong, but some complete tossers in the housing department.
    4 bedroom properties are hard to let to people receiving housing benefit because few families are so large, so they had to let to someone who wasn't affected by the "tax".
  • DotheboyshallDotheboyshall Posts: 40,583
    Forum Member
    But if the council paid £70k for adaptations to the original house, surely they now have to do the same thing wherever the family are living now. Where is the economic logic in having to do that ?
    There isn't one, it's about making political points and being tough against "scroungers".
  • idlewildeidlewilde Posts: 8,698
    Forum Member
    This is down to misapplication of the policy, rather than the principle of it.
  • BerBer Posts: 24,562
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Pensioners tend to vote Tory
    Severely disabled people don't.

    In one...

    As an aside, I don't disagree in principle with the concept of making people pay extra if they have more bedrooms than they need. But the issue is what definition of need is being used, and the lack of suitable alternative housing for those caught up in this.
  • bluebladeblueblade Posts: 88,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Pensioners tend to vote Tory
    Severely disabled people don't.

    They can't say that though. So they should definitely be called to account.

    They'd have to make an exception as there's absolutely no way out, without them looking like nazis.
  • DotheboyshallDotheboyshall Posts: 40,583
    Forum Member
    idlewilde wrote: »
    This is down to misapplication of the policy, rather than the principle of it.
    The policy is being applied correctly - according to the policy. That it's a nasty mean spirited policy is a different matter
  • jjwalesjjwales Posts: 48,566
    Forum Member
    blueblade wrote: »
    Something I don't get here.



    ^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Why are they exempt?.
    I assume it's because they're reasonably well off and so are not entitled to housing benefit.

    Edit: it seems that bedroom tax doesn't apply to those over 65.
    This is a manifest and totally indefensible injustice, and Cameron should personally be called out on it. Utter disgrace.
    Agreed.
  • idlewildeidlewilde Posts: 8,698
    Forum Member
    The policy is being applied correctly - according to the policy. That it's a nasty mean spirited policy is a different matter

    Not true
    They filled in forms asking for “discretionary measures for people with special requirements” but were shocked when they were turned down.
    “To make it worse, a few months *after we left our adapted house we were told we shouldn’t have had to go. Rob did meet the criteria to stay where he was"

    So you're all getting outraged at what looks like a simple cock up at local level.
  • MudboxMudbox Posts: 10,110
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Functional psychopaths do not feel shame.

    Are they psychopaths though, or are they just simply arseholes?
  • DotheboyshallDotheboyshall Posts: 40,583
    Forum Member
    idlewilde wrote: »
    So you're all getting outraged at what looks like a simple cock up at local level.
    Discretionary is the significant word.
  • CELT1987CELT1987 Posts: 12,355
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The bedroom subsidy was flawed from the start, as there's not enough 1 bedroom property's available for people to downsise to. It was an ill thought out policy without any thoughts for the consequences.
  • idlewildeidlewilde Posts: 8,698
    Forum Member
    Discretionary is the significant word.

    There is a mechanism to rightly exempt people such as this gentleman and his carers, and it seems he obviously qualified, but it wasn't applied at local level. That is a cock-up and is simple maladministration. It doesn't make his plight any easier, but it isn't what is being suggested in this thread. At all.
  • MadamfluffMadamfluff Posts: 3,310
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    How the H*ll do people on here know that the elderly couple now living in that house are not themselves disabled and need the adaptions, instead of some rich tory pensioner couple who just don't have to pay the tax.

    My 84 year old Dad has a heart condition which means he cant have a hip replacement so he can barely walk and is disabled, not as disabled as the gentlemen in question but disabled none the less.

    By all means lets have a discussion about this event (and I agree its disgraceful) but I for one am getting fed up with all this disabled V pensioner cr*p when often they are one and the same.
Sign In or Register to comment.