£45 brand new from most motor factors.

I could tell you how to fix ut but not allowed to as a saddo member goes wah wah wah every time I post!

Exactly Paul. Yes there will be a lot of opposition to this change from people currently on benifits. But I hope the normally silent majority like you and I make their voices heard too. Incidentally the £26k talked about is actually the total sum awarded after any tax deductions. So for you to be getting the same amount you would have to be earning circa £35k.

Not got a Mr Clark in mind there scania? lol

Dont talk to me about Vatman. Bob. Had our inspection last year. Looked into how many times a week I went for a crap just about. Make sure I wasn't claiming vat back on too many bog rolls! lol

I'm not sure your mechanic is as clued up as he should be. The cam belt is held in place by a tensioner. Now it either is working or it isn't. A new cam belt is always a good idea if you dont know the cars history. The rocker gasket is a cheap as chips part that can be fitted by an apprentice in 20 minutes on most cars. Your mechanic has no reason to strip the engine unless there is another fault. Re the seller. If the car really has got a major engine problem then you must let him inspect and repair it. You cannot get your mechanic to do it and invoice him without authorisation.

Just read that article on BBC again. I quote 'I see a family having to choose between eating and heating'. For crying out loud your spending £500 of the taxpayers money a month on enjoying yourself. Also go get some money off your ex wife for the upkeep of her 3 kids!!!

I totally agree wages are by and large low osdset. What I do disagree on is that benifits being seen as being anything more than a safety net if you land on hard times. Not to give a person the same standard of living as someone working.

Silverfox, Forgive me here but that example is a bit of an anomally from the 2.4 children I would consider to be the average. But just after a very quick look at it I'd say there are a number of issues needing addressed in that household. Firstly, why isn't the Mother of the 3 children from the first marriage not contributing to their upkeep. Next, OK the ideal job for the man doesn't exist. But he could theoretically do other work, be it stacking shelves in tesco. They then say they have a £60 a month subscription to sky- hardly one of lives essentials. They also smoke approx £60 a week in cigs and say £20 for the baccy. Added to the case of lager at £30. By removing these non essentials from the budget I could save that family £500 a month.

If that is being directed at me Martin, Can you please point out anything I have said which is insulting or untrue. I will try and reply to them and make myself clearer. Also any idea why I cannot use paragraphs or clcik on anything to adjust text in message box?

My point osdset, is that you brought up being a carpenter and inflation. Inflation affects all of us, on benifits or not. What example I am giving with that is that if a skilled person going out doing 40 hours work a week is getting £540 before tax, chances are he has a wife who stays at home raising the children so this is their sole income. Why then should a benifit claimant end up with substantially more a week to keep them than a skilled working man. by the time he gets his deductions taken off he is likely down to £400 a week in his pocket to pay all his bills.

Just did a quick search on london jobs on totaljobs. Carpenter in London is getting between £12-£15 an hour in most cases. So say he gets £13.50 an hour before tax. Thats £540 a week BEFORE tax!

So you don't think sadone, that if somebody else is footing the bill a person should move out of lovely kingston and their £400 a week rented house, and into something more affordable? What the new bill is saying is that if the average working class family can't afford to live in houses like the one you describe. In the interests of fairness why should someone getting their rent paid for them!

You genuinely think £26k take home a year as poor? Come on how many carpenters have you heard of on £78k a year?

Sadone I count £400 x 12 months as £4800.

Sorry about no paragraphs, for some reason I'm writing in paragraphs but when I press post it is all clumped together. Any ideas?

Osdset, I know what you get to keep yourself isn't a lot of money. But it is reasonably enough to feed & cloth you and keep you warm if you are living in a 1 bedroom house. I know this because I've done it. Benefit isn't to give you any more than enough to survive on. Nystagamite, The government has a duty to taxpayers too. It has to be seen as being fair to everyone. I strongly believe responsible people take their family salary into account prior to having children. If a person cannot live on 26k take home a year even with 6 kids there is something wrong with their budgeting. If you cannot afford the rent on the large house your in, then sorry if I'm footing the bill move into a different area where you can. A landlord can ask as much as he likes, If nobody has the money for his property then it remains empty and he gets nothing. This is exactly what is wrong with the welfare system in its present form. It is being seen as an extension of your salary instead of what it should be, a safety net if something goes wrong.

Wait a minute orlok, 26k take home is a bloody good wage if you are working. If you cannot survive on that then your family budgeting cant be up to much. The tax paying general public in the largest part plan their family taking into account their own financial circumstances. If they are in receipt of £26k child benifit PRIOR to anything else then frankly no I don't think they deserve more. I think the politicians actually know the working general public are behind them on this.

So is that rate figured on what your current rent and council tax amount is? Also is this on top of any other income you have? I am fully aware the cap is on a family income not a single person.

Glad I dont work where you do mate!

Am I missing something in this bill? Essentially it is to put a cap on the amount of benifits given to one family at £26000 a year? If this is the case, what is actually wrong with that? I think most of us, long term illness or not could live a fairly good existence on that. In the cases of those staying in rented accomodation in expensive areas. Well as harsh as it sounds, if you aren't footing the bill then sorry you will have to move into cheaper accomodation. I genuinely feel this bill is something a large part of the working general public want.

Going by honeybees up to date scoring system direct from the governments own website, I would read it you will get the 6 for the mental illnesses already agreed on. You would then get a further 6 for the continence issue. But if you are saying you are only losing consciousness every 3 months on average you will score no points there. They are saying you need to be having at least 1 every month to qualify for points on that count. So unless there are any other areas you can think of that you would qualify for further points on then unfortunately I only count that as 12.

Another easier option would be to put the seat out of commission completely. I'm sure a couple of burly drivers could soon detatch the back from the base!

Perhaps I should of started my post with ''I don't think you will win any appeal because'' ? Before critisizing me, Think how we all would be reacting if someone came on the forums saying her boss didn't take appropriate action against someone who got so drunk she can't remember what she did, and performed a sex act in public. He would be vilified on this forum. How would one of us feel if it was our wives or worse still teenage daughter who came home upset after witnessing whatever went on. OK my comments are harsh. But I stand by the statement we are all responsible for our own behaviour.

Wouldn't it come down to the frequency of you losing consciousness or losing control of your bodily fucntions? By my reckoning if it is only happening on average every 3 months, You would be entitled to 6 points on the bodily functions scoring and 0 on the loss of consciousness. I suppose the governments way of thinking is that this oly happens to you 4 times a year on average you could theoretically do some sort of work.