Anorexic mother-of-four is found dead in her freezing cold flat wearing a hat and scarf after 'her benefits were cut when she was too ill to attend a meeting - leaving her unable to afford the heating'

First topic message reminder :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5063075/Mother-dead-Universal-Credit-cut.html




An anorexic mother-of-four died wearing a scarf and coat inside her freezing home after her benefits was cut when she was too ill to attend a meeting, according to her grieving family.
Elaine Morrall passed away in her house in Runcorn, Cheshire, and her mother claims her financial woes meant she switched the heating off until her children got home from school.
A cause of death has not been revealed for the 38-year-old, who suffered from an eating disorder and mental health problems.
In recent days, a fundraising campaign has been launched to raise money for her devastated four children.
Elaine's mum, Linda, sent a raging and 'broken-hearted' letter to her local councillor in Halton.
In in an open letter on Facebook, she wrote: 'How many people have got to die before this government realises they are killing vulnerable people?'
Her plea has gone viral on social media.
Linda said: 'My daughter lived in Boston Ave. She died on the afternoon of 2 November, 2017 at home on her own. She was 38yrs.
'In the cold with her coat & scarf on. Because she wouldn't put her heating on until her kids came home from school. Why?? Because she couldn't afford it. 

'Because she was severely depressed. Suffered from eating disorder & many other problems for many years.


Mainly due to authoritarians of one form or another. I can give you details. Was in & out of hospital in recent months in intensive care.
'But was deemed not ill enough for ESA [Employment and Support Allowance]. Had her benefits stopped numerous times, which in turn stopped her housing benefit.
'No income but expected to be able to pay full rent. Was told being in intensive care was not sufficient reason for failing to attend a universal credit interview.
'I went to the job centre to inform them that she couldn't attend. But benefits stopped again. 


'Uncaring housing taking her to court. She's due to go to court on Monday.
'Is being dead now enough reason? Is that what's had to happen to prove she was ill?
'How many people have got to die before this government realises they are killing vulnerable people??
'What are you and your fellow councillors going to do to protect your constituents?'
Halton MP Derek Twigg, who is now working with the family, said: 'It is a very tragic case and I am providing assistance to my constituent.'
A Department for Work and Pensions spokesman said: 'Our thoughts are with Ms Morrall's family at this difficult time.

What is the difference between being in the work-related ESA group and Job seeker's allowance? The rates of pay seem to be the same.

Also, how does universal credit work?

Raggamuffin wrote:What is the difference between being in the work-related ESA group and Job seeker's allowance? The rates of pay seem to be the same.

Also, how does universal credit work?

Pass.
This is where Ty came in useful. She knew everything about benefits and explained who got what and why very clearly.

I get tax credits to top up my wages. Don't know anything aboit universal credit.

https://www.gov.uk/universal-credit

Ben Reilly wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Our last lot of left wing govt politicians left us with a benefits system that paid unemployed people up to 100,000 pounds a year in handouts for rent and spending money... for them to stay in luxury pads in expensive parts of the country... not have to go to work... and with little or no challenge from the job centre ever to actually have to start looking to get into work... paid a fortune to sit around all day... while everyone else has to go to work every day to afford what an average yearly salary of about 20,000 to 25,000 (before tax) can get them...!!!

1) I don't believe you

2) Even if you're right, so the fuck what? It's far better than them starving in the streets, right?

3) Outcomes are the only priority for a healthier, happier society -- enforcing some simplistic view of what's fair does not build great societies.

1) What I said is 100% true, and 100% proveable (with a simple bit of internet searching)...


2) Are you serious...!? You don't see any problems with having a benefits system that pays out up tp 100,000 pounds a year to unemployed people when that is 4 times the average yearly salary of working people...? Are you mad!?


3) What are you waffling about man!? The outcome was the overwhelming vast majority of society being pissed off about it!!!

And hold on a minute... 'enforcement of fairness does not build great societies'...!!!???

You leftys are constantly pushing for 'enforcement of (your) simplistic views of fairness' for the good of 'building a greater society'...!!!

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

1) I don't believe you

2) Even if you're right, so the fuck what? It's far better than them starving in the streets, right?

3) Outcomes are the only priority for a healthier, happier society -- enforcing some simplistic view of what's fair does not build great societies.

You think that fairness is not important? In that case, why do you care if some people starve in the streets?

So you approve of people getting money for doing nothing? I never knew you were such a capitalist.

Green from me!

Syl wrote:That's been my way of thinking for decades, no matter who is in government....they all look after themselves in the long run.

The poor are still poor, the rich get richer, and the middle of the roaders get poorer because wages can never keep up with inflation and they get sweet sod all in help.

I know women who work full time and spend the majority of their wages on child care which is astronomical. They cant get their kids into state funded nursery places because those are reserved for parents on benefits.

I know people who have never claimed a penny throughout their lives, bought their houses over 25 years and seen them eaten up by care home fees in a couple of years at the end of their lives.

Isn't inflation caused by demand though? I don't think inflation happens because of an increase in sales of Gucci handbags, it's ordinary people who spend money and push up the cost. That would happen under a Labour government as well.

The Government could put interest rates up in order to curb inflation, but then people would complain about their mortgage repayments and/or losing their homes. They could raise the national living wage/minimum wage, but that could put companies out of business or cause them to cut staff, leading to a loss of jobs.

I'd like to see a fall in house prices and rents, but that's not going to happen because direct interference in the property market would be too courageous for any political party.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:That's been my way of thinking for decades, no matter who is in government....they all look after themselves in the long run.

The poor are still poor, the rich get richer, and the middle of the roaders get poorer because wages can never keep up with inflation and they get sweet sod all in help.

I know women who work full time and spend the majority of their wages on child care which is astronomical. They cant get their kids into state funded nursery places because those are reserved for parents on benefits.

I know people who have never claimed a penny throughout their lives, bought their houses over 25 years and seen them eaten up by care home fees in a couple of years at the end of their lives.

Isn't inflation caused by demand though? I don't think inflation happens because of an increase in sales of Gucci handbags, it's ordinary people who spend money and push up the cost. That would happen under a Labour government as well.

The Government could put interest rates up in order to curb inflation, but then people would complain about their mortgage repayments and/or losing their homes. They could raise the national living wage/minimum wage, but that could put companies out of business or cause them to cut staff, leading to a loss of jobs.

I'd like to see a fall in house prices and rents, but that's not going to happen because direct interference in the property market would be too courageous for any political party.

Many things push up prices. Peoples wages don't rise in accordance to the inflation rate...many wages have been frozen for years.
People have to eat but food bills are always going up. Think what your weekly shop costs now compared to 5 years ago like for like.

Mortgage interest rates are at a 10 year low....people with savings suffer whilst house byers benefit. I remember when we bought a house the interest rate rose to 17%....its a fraction of that now.
Unfortunately for the many who cant afford a mortgage or are not in reliable jobs to maintain one rent prices are astronomical.
Amother down side is the people who paid sky high interest rate charges in the 80's and 90's now lose out drastically on any savings they may have accrued.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Isn't inflation caused by demand though? I don't think inflation happens because of an increase in sales of Gucci handbags, it's ordinary people who spend money and push up the cost. That would happen under a Labour government as well.

The Government could put interest rates up in order to curb inflation, but then people would complain about their mortgage repayments and/or losing their homes. They could raise the national living wage/minimum wage, but that could put companies out of business or cause them to cut staff, leading to a loss of jobs.

I'd like to see a fall in house prices and rents, but that's not going to happen because direct interference in the property market would be too courageous for any political party.

Many things push up prices. Peoples wages don't rise in accordance to the inflation rate...many wages have been frozen for years.
People have to eat but food bills are always going up. Think what your weekly shop costs now compared to 5 years ago like for like.

Mortgage interest rates are at a 10 year low....people with savings suffer whilst house byers benefit. I remember when we bought a house the interest rate rose to 17%....its a fraction of that now.
Unfortunately for the many who cant afford a mortgage or are not in reliable jobs to maintain one rent prices are astronomical.
Amother down side is the people who paid sky high interest rate charges in the 80's and 90's now lose out drastically on any savings they may have accrued.

If wages rise, inflation will rise as well - it's how it works. I don't have a weekly shopping cost really, but I don't think I spend more than I used to - especially at Aldi.

Raising mortgage rates will curb inflation and house prices, and savers will benefit.

I would benefit a lot if interest rates were to start rising again...no mortgage and savings. Others would find themselves a lot worse off (people who are buying and renting) which is the position we were in for decades when we were younger....there will always be losers and winners.

Seriously you don't think your food bills have risen?
Mine have and there is only two of us now.
I do shop at Aldi sometimes and I agree the prices there are cheaper, some of the food though is not as good...especially fresh food like fruit and veg, it goes off and has to be thrown, which makes it not as cheap as some of the more expensive places to shop.

Petrol is astronomical, if you shop daily instead of weekly ..as most of the Aldis, Asda's, M&S etc are not within walking distance, there's another expense.

Syl wrote:I would benefit a lot if interest rates were to start rising again...no mortgage and savings. Others would find themselves a lot worse off (people who are buying and renting) which is the position we were in for decades when we were younger....there will always be losers and winners.

Seriously you don't think your food bills have risen?
Mine have and there is only two of us now.
I do shop at Aldi sometimes and I agree the prices there are cheaper, some of the food though is not as good...especially fresh food like fruit and veg, it goes off and has to be thrown, which makes it not as cheap as some of the more expensive places to shop.

Petrol is astronomical, if you shop daily instead of weekly ..as most of the Aldis, Asda's, M&S etc are not within walking distance, there's another expense.

I just don't make a note of what I spend at the supermarket. In fact, I avoid supermarkets as much as possible.

Aldi is incredibly cheap, and their fruit and veg are just as good IMO.

OK, I suppose it depends whereabouts you live and what you do for a living, whether you are self employed, mortgage free, renting, lots of things.

I bet the vast majority of working class people in this country see prices rising far exceeding their wage increases though.

Syl wrote:OK, I suppose it depends whereabouts you live and what you do for a living, whether you are self employed, mortgage free, renting, lots of things.

I bet the vast majority of working class people in this country see prices rising far exceeding their wage increases though.

I never know what petrol costs either. I mean I know how much I'm paying to fill the tank, but I never compare prices or know if it's more than I used to pay.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:OK, I suppose it depends whereabouts you live and what you do for a living, whether you are self employed, mortgage free, renting, lots of things.

I bet the vast majority of working class people in this country see prices rising far exceeding their wage increases though.

I never know what petrol costs either. I mean I know how much I'm paying to fill the tank, but I never compare prices or know if it's more than I used to pay.

You sound like you are either very rich or very vague.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I never know what petrol costs either. I mean I know how much I'm paying to fill the tank, but I never compare prices or know if it's more than I used to pay.

You sound like you are either very rich or very vague.  

Neither really. I'm very prudent with money and don't go into debt, and I save. I just don't bother to compare prices or think what I used to spend. I don't really spend a lot on holidays or that kind of thing.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

You sound like you are either very rich or very vague.  

Neither really. I'm very prudent with money and don't go into debt, and I save. I just don't bother to compare prices or think what I used to spend. I don't really spend a lot on holidays or that kind of thing.

I think the only debt we have ever been in was my OH's first cab and the mortgage.

I keep reading about how many pensioners are still in debt and still owe on their mortgages....frightening thought.