From Hillsborough to Hillingdon in 24 hours. Here we go.

On Tuesday, Mark Neary, Father of Steven Neary, whose battles with the rotten borough of Hillingdon I have documented many times, HERE and HERE and HERE, had an interview with the Housing Officer of Hillingdon. He needed to do so for several reasons.

Mark is a highly specialised counsellor for men with emotional problems. The agency that he worked for has stopped receiving the full funding that paid his wages. Rather than leave his clients in the lurch, Mark became self-employed a few months ago, and although he has retained all his clients, it has meant extra expenditure – premises etc, that has left him struggling financially. Please remember that Mark works in addition to being Steven’s main carer and fighting the lengthy legal battles on his behalf. I truly don’t know how he does it.

Mark’s wife is now a very sick lady. Mark had to choose between caring for her or caring for his son. Hence he left his wife in the capable hands of her Doctor and medical staff, and moved to new accommodation with Steven three years ago. It was Solomon’s choice, he could not care for both, and definitely not in the same premises. Not surprisingly, he still cares very deeply about his ex-wife and her welfare.

Over the past three years, the rent of his and Steven’s new accommodation has increased to £950 a month. That is £51 a month above the present ‘cap’. Originally the Housing Benefit covered 2/3 of the rent and Mark paid the balance out of his wages. Recently, only 1/3 of the rent has been covered by Steven’s housing benefit, leaving Mark to find around £650 a month. He has been struggling to do so. Hence the application for ‘extra discretional funding’.

Surprise! Although the regulations for additional discretionary funding have not changed over the past three years, the Housing Officer announced ‘that they had decided to take a fresh look at the regulations’ and have now decided that since Mark has a potential half interest in his ex-marital home, he is not entitled to any assistance. He would have to make his sick wife homeless and sell the house!

This is obviously out of the question, and I very much doubt that there is a judge in the land who would force a sale on his sick wife under the circumstances, but it matters not a jot that this wouldn’t happen – for Hillingdon were taking into account that ‘it could‘.

Surely Steven has some entitlement in his own right? Indeed he does. He is entitled to Independent Living payments. It could even potentially pay the full rent of the house he is in now. The sting is coming…Mark could not then live in the house, it would no longer qualify as ‘independent living’. The Housing Officer maintained a zen like expression. Not a flicker of a smile. Game set and match to Hillingdon.

For Hillingdon know perfectly well that Steven parted from Mark becomes an individual displaying ’challenging behaviour’. Such challenging behaviour would not last five minutes in an ‘independant placement’, and Steven would quickly be on his way back to the ‘Positive Behaviour Unit’ that Mark has spent a year fighting to get him out of. This time it would not be possible to argue that it was not in Steven’s ‘best interests’ to be parted from Mark – since Mark, a single man without dependents would have become intentionally homeless and thus not entitled to any housing benefit.

Mark cannot work any extra hours to cover the increased rent because by mysterious circumstances, on Monday, Mark had his FACE interview to decide what support he was entitled to for caring for Steven. Under the new FACE regulations, they cannot take into account the need for extra support as a result of challenging behaviour; the need for respite; or the need and provision of transport. The very things that Steven’s care package relies on. Without those items taken into account it is almost certain that Steven’s care package will be slashed. Without the support of carers, Mark is limited in the time he can work.

I truly do not know how long Mark can continue to fight for the right to care for his son in the face of Hillingdon’s obsessive desire to get their own way. They have been thwarted and bitterly criticised by a High Court judge, ordered to pay Steven (not Mark, the money will be in the Court of Protection) £35,000 plus extensive legal fees for illegally detaining Steven and parting him from his Father – yet still they dream up new ways to achieve their chosen outcome.

Once they have successfully parted Steven from his Father through the housing benefit route, they will be able to do what they want. They will have succeeded in removing the powerful argument upheld by the High Court that it was in Steven’s best interests to live with his Father.

Or Mark could throw his sick wife out onto the street.

What would you do?

m.barnes September 15, 2012 at 22:41

Delighted to see Marks post – fingers crossed ( at least it made the
broadsheets straight away this time).

Penseivat September 15, 2012 at 19:26

F211, In a perfect world, we could have both – the only change being the
diversity officers helping kiddiwinkies across the road and development
champions getting to grips with “Trigger’s broom”!

Farenheit211 September 15, 2012 at 09:04

Pense, I also am glad that this case is resolved. Fighting councils
especially those Lefty ones that are subject to ‘producer capture’ isn’t easy.

You are right when you say ‘I hope the right people are elected’ because
that is the way to change things. If everyone who had an issue with councilors
and MP’s going overboard for multiculturalism for example voted for an
independent (non fascist) candidate who was against multiculturalism then the
permanent Left that parasites off our taxes would start to be rightfully
starved. What would you rather have? School crossing attendants and
roadsweepers or diversity officers and non jobs like ‘development
champions’.

Mark in Mayenne
September 15, 2012 at 08:23

Cool

Penseivat September 14, 2012 at 22:14

Mark, That is really good news and I hope that it is resolved to your
satisfaction. What disturbs me, though, is that if sufficient publicity hadn’t
been given to this, then Hillingdon Council would have continued in their
blinkered, ultra-left-wing-ish, way in ignoring anyone who who didn’t fit
their criteria – non-white, immigrant (illegal or otherwise), hated Margaret
Thatcher (lessons available in the tax-payer funded community centre) with
extra credit if they were lesbian, homosexual, transgendered or pregnant – I
defy anyone from Hillingdon Council to declare me mistaken and I shall shower
them with evidence to the contrary. Hopefully, though the cynical side of me
suggests it will mean nothing more than a sparrrows fart in a storm, every
single councillor should be made to stand up and state whether they supported
this unfortunate incident or not (no porkie pies, now). Then let the good
citizens of the borough vote for their candidate. Hopefully, the right people
will be elected.

Mason Dixon September 14, 2012 at 20:59

hay susie scally traitor who’se paying for kate and Billy to sue the french
then???

“If you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen” springs to
mind!!!!

I too have been struck by this post, by the mindless adoration for someone
who claims they are “poverty stricken”
but who has a husband in employment,
money for the olympic games etc.,. How on earth would she manage if she had an
unemployed husband?
why have kids if you can’t afford them?

well if you are fit enough to write a blog and criticise those that fund
your survival get a job as a website designer or IT tech you dont need to do
anything physical all done from your own chair.

Woman on
a Raft September 14, 2012 at
22:55

?

The Meissen
Bison September 15, 2012 at 00:24

!

JuliaM September 15, 2012 at 05:26

I think it’s someone from the Hillsborough thread. Expect a few
instances of this for the next few posts, until they get bored.

m.barnes
September 15, 2012 at 22:39

Think you might be right. Ah well.

Mark Neary September 14, 2012 at 18:30

Sorry, that last sentence should have read “I cant thank Anna and the
people who have tweeted, blogged or facebooked my dilemma enough”

Woman on
a Raft September 14, 2012 at
19:56

Good news then. I hope your troubles are behind you.

GildasTheMonk
September 15, 2012 at 10:15

Good news indeed

Mark Neary September 14, 2012 at 18:28

Thank you Anna. It has been a very strange 48 hours. Today, I was invited
onto a breakfast radio programme to talk about the situation and then Linda
Saunders came on. She made an astonishing statement that she had personally
intervened in the case this morning and had reinstated the housing benefit
whilst further discussions take place. The interviewer asked her about a
possible connection between the sudden termination of the benefit and the
recent damages award. It was a phenomenal u turn and I cant thank Anna and all
the people who have tweeted, blogged or facebooked my dilemma.

What on earth has the last 48 hours been about?

ExPatAlfie September 14, 2012 at 18:28

Simples. Adopt the Islamic faith and let the majority of Hilingdon Council
take up the fight. Job done.

GildasTheMonk
September 14, 2012 at 10:17

i suppose the only answer is some form of judicial review. Can he get legal
aid?

Iain September 14, 2012 at 08:40

I note this was picked up in the Times this morning (behind the
paywall).

Mark in Mayenne
September 14, 2012 at 07:45

Keep fighting, Anna

Greg Tingey September 14, 2012 at 07:38

“Something lingering, with boiling oil in it” comes to mind!

Woodsy42 September
13, 2012 at 22:03

Moving over the council border or getting a lawyer is the obvious move. But
it also depends what responsibility the council have for his wife, if he did
throw her out would the council then have to rehouse her? That might even work
to her advantage.
Some years ago we evicted an old lady from a property we
inherited rented out, The tiny property was very old and completely
unmodernised but she couldn’t stand the idea of workmen even to decorate it
and make it more comfortable, so we talked it all through with her daughter,
who went in every day to care for her, and a solicitor, to make a plan. It
felt really wierd to do it (and we would have backtracked had the plan failed)
but as soon as she got the eviction notice and her daughter went to the
council and made a fuss the elderly lady was immediately rehoused by the
council in sheltered accommodation all paid for by social services or whoever.
She was 100% delighted, the daughter was delighted, and they asked why we
hadn’t done it sooner!

Ted Treen September 13, 2012 at 21:54

I would find something with a pointy end, make it even MORE pointy, and
then…

GildasTheMonk
September 13, 2012 at 21:31

I’d find a smart lawyer. And claim asylum, as others above have
observed.

Penseivat September 13, 2012 at 20:40

The first thing I’d do is book myself in for 5 sessions at a tanning shop
so that I’d look like I came from the Dark Continent. Then I would turn up at
the Council offices, speak in a tongue they had never heard before but add the
the phrase ‘Need house. Need money.” somewhere in the gibberish. As I would
then meet all the necessary criteria: Not white; Can’t speak English: Want
money: Want House, would suggest that within 30 minutes several Grunaird
reading social workers will be fawning all over me throwing shedloads of cash
and ordering a limousine – nothing as chavish as a taxi – to take me to my
luxurious taxpayer funded pad while the same social workers spend the rest of
the evening apologising for all the evil things the British Empire did to my
country – wherever that may be. Reading this back, it is either part of a
script for the next Sacha Baron Cohen movie or the correct answer to a role
play exercise by Hillingdon Council. Scary, really.

Farenheit211 September 15, 2012 at 08:14

Penseivat, you sound like you’ve spent time in the London Borough of
Newham. There some of the ‘refugees’ have better cars than the people who
were born there and have paid taxes there.

Brass Monkey
September 13, 2012 at 19:32

I em ze CEO unt you vill do as I zay

Mark in Mayenne
September 13, 2012 at 19:06

http://hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/repository/report/HIP_report.pdf

Mark in Mayenne
September 13, 2012 at 19:08

Sorry, slip of the keyboard, please ignore

Dave H September 13, 2012 at 19:01

They’re just a bunch of control freaks who don’t like losing. Apparently if
a parent de-registers a child from school to educate at home instead, they
routinely refer them to social services. (Note that all sorts of guidance and
practice elsewhere in the country does not consider this to be a matter for
social services unless there are other indicators of a problem).

I agree with those above, the best thing to do is not to be in
Hillingdon.

Elena ‘andcart
September 13, 2012 at 18:33

Jeezuz. I do not believe this. Well, I do, but they surely cannot get away
with this. Can they? I am gob smacked. I thought that Care in the Home was
something everybody wanted. Instead of which, Mark Neary has a spiteful
Vendetta on his hands.

Wolfers September 13, 2012 at 18:21

It may sound glib, and it isn’t meant to, but I think the first thing I’d
do would be to move out of Hillingdon, even if only by a couple of yards.
Removing yourself from their jurisdiction at least deals with one of the more
pressing issues.

Elena ‘andcart
September 13, 2012 at 18:34

Good one. Yer, me too.

JuliaM September
13, 2012 at 17:49

“What would you do?”

If this were America, I’d be inclined to go postal.

Woman on a
Raft September 13, 2012 at 17:44

Oh dear. I’ve just realized the slimeball has resigned to spend more time
with his money before this catches up with him.

Woman on a
Raft September 13, 2012 at 17:40

I’d throw Hugh Dunnachie out on his sorry arse by tomorrow teatime for
gross misconduct, confiscate his wages and pay somebody half as much to do the
job. There’s no shortage of takers; the country is well-supplied with mediocre
social work managers and they’d all do a better job than him.

http://www.hillingdon.gov.uk/index.jsp?articleid=17880

“I am passionate in my commitment to people of the borough and working
with the council’s administration, my job is to ensure that we continue
“Putting our Residents first.”

Lie to yourself Dunnachie, but don’t expect me to be taken in by your
bletherings. You are not worth the chewing gum on the pavement outside your
office. The half of the wages saved would go to pay for a place for Steven and
Mark.

Sorted. Oh, and don’t worry about tribunals. There is such a thing as gross
misconduct and the bench would be well-supplied with an opinion from the
various judges. Tribunals are not poodles but they are inclined to take the
opinion of judges very seriously. So whistle for your compo, Dunnachie, and
remember – it is possible to sue complainants for the cost of bringing a
spurious case. Then he can pay the lawyers out of his own pocket.