Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking
She missed 8 appointments, not just the one. She didn't get sanctioned for missing that one. It was only when the missed appointments mounted up, all without explanation, that they took action.
She apparently could attend hospital appointments, but not make an online entry or a phone call? Her partner could even have done it. She obviously thought she could get away with it multiple times, so didn't take any avoiding action.
The comments section accompanying the article isn't exactly supportive of her.
That is a blatant lie, as she missed/avoided multiple appointments.
Unless there was a previous letter, the DWP letter would suggest that the sanctions didn't start until until the face-to-face 8th Feb 17 appointment. At that point she would have been able to explain herself, but it wasn't accepted. The GP letter was dated 14th Mar 17. She should have been able to produce hospital letters.
The definition of excess bedrooms was set in place decades before 2010. It applied to private rented sector. No changes were initially made. Any changes were ones the Labour didn't introduce.
|
You've clearly never had to experience the death of a child.
Seeing as you're back to trying to politicise this thread, the 'overlarge' rule for the private rented sector was brought in on 15/1/89 by the Tories at the same time that Housing Benefit claims had to be referred to the Rent Officer to ensure that it was not 'significantly above a reasonable market rent'. This was after they abolished the right to have a 'Fair Rent' registered, meaning that on the one hand rent controls were abolished, but the Government didn't want to pay out more in Housing Benefit, thus leaving people to pay the difference out of the money intended for day to day living expenses.
When the idea of abolishing rent controls was first mooted, Thatcher said that she would be prepared to pay out extra Housing Benefit, but when it happened, this was reneged on.