- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Disabled cyclist (via YouTube)Half of disabled cyclists fear being seen cycling in case they lose benefits
Almost half of disabled cyclists are afraid of being seen riding their bikes due to the fear that being seen to be “too active” could cost them their benefits, according to the Wheels for Wellbeing charity.
Wheels for Wellbeing supports disabled people of all ages and abilities to enjoy the benefits of cycling. The Huffington Post reports that the charity surveyed 202 disabled cyclists and found that 72 per cent use their bikes as mobility aids, while three quarters find cycling easier than walking.
Despite this, almost half of respondents feared that being seen riding their bikes could result in losing their benefits. 17 per cent of those people nowride less as a consequence, while six per cent have had their benefits reduced or withdrawn because they cycled.
While many respondents own non-standard cycles, such as recumbent tricycles, or bikes with electrical assist, 43 per cent own a standard two-wheeled bike, which makes it hard for others to tell they are disabled.
John, in his late 50s, was born with cerebral palsy, and struggles to walk. He has cycled since the age of six, but when a neighbour started photographing him on his bike four years ago, he stopped, fearing he would be reported and that his benefits would be taken away.
He said: “I can’t walk properly. Walking is dangerous for me, because I have falls, but if I get on a bike or get in a swimming pool then you can’t tell I have got cerebral palsy.
“I used to cycle to work every day. I haven’t cycled for four years, and it has ruined my life; it’s awful. Cycling to me is just as important as the day I fell in love.
“I thought I would be cycling until I was 90. I was going to put a badge on the bike saying ‘I’m a disabled cyclist, if you knock me over and kill me don’t blame yourself, this is the way I would have wanted to go, out on my bike’.”
Isabelle Clement, director of Wheels for Wellbeing, said: “If it’s stopping people cycling it is also probably stopping them trying to do any physical activity, because people are so concerned about the hostile environment out there.
“It condemns them to worse health, shorter lives and social isolation, which can lead to depression. I am sure this isn’t the policy intention but it is a result of the current environment.
“I think the government needs to really tackle that through statements, through clarifications; really get the message out once it’s aware of it, which by now it must be. Otherwise, even with the best and most inclusive cycling infrastructure, those who could benefit most won’t be able to access it.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- hmas1974 4 sec ago
Irrespective of the fact that bikes don't have licence plates or other means of identification, your approach won't work. Richmond Park isn't flat...
- mattw 43 min 3 sec ago
Arrest now made. As a (very) local, my feeling is that may be a drugs turf war of some sort.
- wtjs 4 hours 45 min ago
Yes! Nineteen Eighty-Four is where the police learn to construct their publicity releases and other statements: our thoughts and prayers are with.....
- Dnnnnnn 5 hours 19 min ago
That could be hundreds of addresses, though? In the linked story, Jim Waterson said he spent hours staking out one block......
- mdavidford 5 hours 47 min ago
Go up or down hill.
- Zebra 5 hours 57 min ago
Personally, I thought that the Astana Willier was the best looking bike in the peleton for the past couple of years.
- Prosper0 6 hours 35 min ago
Looking forward to picking the shoes up on Sports Pursuit soon.
- mark1a 6 hours 39 min ago
Judging by the DC Rainmaker review, and looking at the many basic features that are missing and scheduled for H1 next year, I would say that a...
Add new comment
23 comments
A sobering read there CrippledBiker, thanks for taking the time to write that.
I think it's fair to say I've probably got a closer perspective on this than almost any of those commenting so far..?
The fraud rate on Disability Benefits is a rounding error. It is incredibly difficult to get anything, let alone the correct award - I was lucky enough to get what I needed first time, in no small part from my demonstration of the physical effects of my disability (Amusingly, dislocating and reducing both my shoulders utterly squicked out the assessor, which was hilarious) - but I know other people, with the exact same circumstances as me, some of them worse, who've been denied and had to fight for months and months to get the help they need.
Keep in mind, things like blue badges, dial-a-ride, and other avenues to help base level access all hang off PIP; No PIP, no help.
I've had issues with riding my 'cycles, including threats to report me for faking it. I had trepidation about my old commute (Romford <-> Euston via A13/CS13/CS3, 23mi each way) due to this exact issue.
I've also had issues when people have seen me transferring or taking a few steps when necessary - to the point where I now utterly refuse to make use of my legs in public or where people I do not know might see me.
I've been maliciously reported for "faking it" in the past, and I've had threats to do so when I've had negative encounters with motons.
I don't care what your politics might be; Claiming that there isn't a hostile environment towards the disabled in the UK right now shows an absolute and total lack of knowledge or awareness.
That's mostly correct, but for clarity;
There are vehicles that are less than "Total Allowance"; the Peugeot 108, Suzuki Celerio, and Kia Picanto are all examples - I don't think anybody would argue that they are "Luxury" in any way, but they're free and they leave a few quid in your pocket from the mobility allowance, which helps go towards the fuel costs.
There are also some quite nice cars on the scheme - I've currently got a Ford S-Max Ti Sport, and the only reason I went for the Sport over the regular Ti was the addition of heated seats (which are now a totally banned item on Motability, regardless of your needs - a problem for those with muscularskeletal conditions) - it was the exact same price otherwise.
For the privilege of having this vehicle, I paid an additional, up-front amount of £3,300. I have to have a large vehicle, to transport my 'chair and handcycles, and I have to have an automatic, because my physical issues preclude a manual. I also had to find money to pay for a hoist, though that was subsidised, which I own and get to keep when the vehicle goes back.
I do not pay an additional amount monthly, it's a "total award", and I will get no value returned of that £3,300 - so it essentially costs me £1,100 a year to have, and I've had it for 2 years and done ~7,300 miles, which is nothing, really, so I might be allowed to keep it for the maximum of 5, but it's at their discretion.
So, anybody you see with a nice new car, well - let's go back to that BMW example that's so often thrown about. For a BMW, you've paid a minimum top-up of £250 for a 2 series 5dr. For an X1, you've paid a minimum top-up of £899. Keep in mind that that is the base spec, and is for a manual - so will be unavailable to a large portion of those who qualify.
This might sound pretty good, but remember that disabled persons are demonstrably the poorest, least well off in society. Also, keep in mind that Motability sells that vehicle at the end of the lease, and it makes sense for them to provide cars that won't deprecate so fast.
You also need to keep in mind that, for certain conditions, a high seating position is essential - the main reason I ended up going for the S-Max over anything else was that it was the first vehicle I tried that day where the door opened just the right amount, the seat was just the right height, the sill was just the right depth, and the wheel was in just the right place for me to do an easy, unassisted, seated transfer with no use of my legs, and back again, without having to use a transfer handle or other piece of additional kit to keep track of. I couldn't use my second choice, a VW Passat Estate, nearly as easily, since it just wasn't quite high enough.
Oh, and that £3,300, plus the amount I'll pay in Mobility Component? Yeah, that's still less than my wheelchair cost - and I've got a manual, unpowered, fixed chair, albeit a titanium and chrome-moly one with carbonfibre bits. A powerchair with tilt-in-space, or other high dependency configurations? Yeah, they're stupid expensive and there's very little help available now unless you have one of a specific group of conditions. The NHS does not provide this kind of chair, and with the ongoing sneaky privatisation, the backdoor you could use to get them to part-fund (the NHS Wheelchair Voucher) is no longer guaranteed, as the private providers you're forced to now go through have no obligation to provide it to you if they don't want to - and they don't want to, they want you in a chair they own and that they get monthly risiduals for, that you're contractually obligated to have repaired by them and that fits nobody - you can't even change the tyres yourself, you MUST get them to do it and you get no say on what tyres you get or even what chair.
With the example given above by BtB - I know quite a few people who, through no fault of their own, are unable to perform "normal" work activities; They either don't have the stamina, the mental capacity, or the ability to commit to a normal 9-5 routine. Hell, I struggle when it's really hot or when it's particularly cold, because they both make my disabilities worse in different ways.
Most of the people I know in that circumstance have to supplement their incomes in other ways, because PIP just isn't enough to live off on it's own. I'm not even talking living the high life, I'm talking about fulfilling the basics - rent, food, heat, transport, internet. They tend to go towards sex work, but I know at least one is an occasional, let's say, amateur indepentant distributor of pharmacutical goods - since they use it for analgesia themselves, it was an easy progression for them.
So, if you're advocating cutting what little assistance the disabled currently get, I'll kindly ask you to consider the full consequences; They've already squeezed us until the pips squeak. There's nothing left to cut - People are already dying from this. We are by far the most deeply affected by these cuts, and we've already got a big fight coming soon if they start taking guards off trains to save money.
Finally, the example people always use when complaining is "flat screen TV". I defy you to find any other type on the market today. It is a stupid, ridiculous and farcical thing to complain about - you might as well moan that they've got fridges.
I'm pretty sure we all know of at least one person who appears to be "cheating the system". The person who seems to enjoy fags and a flat screen telly, who always seems to have a new car yet who's kids get picked up by taxi and chaperone every morning for school. Who seem to have a nice house and holidays all without the inconvenience of working. But the truth is that you know feck all about the reality of those peoples lives. Maybe they are cheating the system, maybe they are not. Maybe they have illigitimate sources of income, maybe they have perfectly legitimate though non obvious sources. If you have reasonable suspicions of criminal activity then pass it on, I believe there are anonymous methods to do so. However, to spout unsubstantiated gossip hurts the best interests of those who rely on a fair system of benefits and assistance they are entitled to, and which any of us might find ourselves reliant on with a change of circumstances.
This story is about the shortcomings of the system, not about populist anecdotal fallacies of free cars and handouts to the undeserving.
And BTBS, Dottigirl has an absolutely valid point. If you have fair reason to believe, and evidence, that he is gaming the system, report him. Or shut up complaining about it and casting unsubstantiated aspersions.
Oh, FFS. BtB is trolling again. Has totally derailed this conversation.
BtB - if you really think (and have proof) he's working the system, shut up about it and report him. Do be sure though. I've had my bank accounts gone through with a fine-tooth comb before now. It was a fucking horrible experience. I even had to justify the bills money my housemates had paid me. Every single bill. I was scared of selling anything on eBay in case that also was counted as income.
In the meantime, can we return to disabled cycling please?
I didn't derail anything, I made mention of how unfair it was to punish people riding bikes that had disabilities, however there are people who are on disability benefits who are self inflicted and have no incentive to come off benefits/get healthy and continue to do damage to their bodies. I answered a direct question and someone who disbelieved the scenario I described. To think this never happens (people self inflicting and being the root cause of their problems) is naive
Maybe if they were cycling it could actually help with the issue at hand but then given what this article mentions there's even less liklihood these people would do so or want to do exercise because of fear of losing their benefits, the system actually fucks itself over in some instances (by not making an incentive to get healthy) not to mention fucking over people who are trying their best to get about or is the only option for them to get about, as well as using cycling as a means to help with mental health and/or physical health so as to try stave off deterioration/getting worse.
Nope, you and others aren't able to grasp that discussing matters about both ends of the scale is acceptable. You want to dictate what can/can't be discussed.
Whatever modabe
What? is this a plea from BTBs about accepting differing points of view?
"Nope, you and others aren't able to grasp that discussing matters about both ends of the scale is acceptable. "
Oh, the irony.
I have experience of this.
My cycling counted against me at the assessments. Everything counts against you there though.
I had to go through the appeal system, twice, which I turned up to with my bike and was allowed to leave it a few yards down the hall. The appeal people were lovely, and were very positive about my attempts to keep active.
I've spoken with other disabled people who are in permanent terror of being penalised for cycling, and have cut back or stopped because of it. Their mental and physical health has since suffered.
I hate this country sometimes. The system is so cruel.
Don't hate the country, I've lived in several & believe me, this one isn't bad at all. Do, tho, feel free to despise the people, of whatever political persuasion, who run it. Our electoral system seems explicitly designed to select idiots with a grossly inflated idea of their own abilities (IMHO; I'm sure other opinions are available...).
Unfortunatly we had the opposite experience of the appeals process. The medical and legal experts were very nice. The disability “expert” was a total prick. He clearly acted like my wife didn’t have a disability because it wasn’t visible and point blank refused to be accommodating, getting aggressive and repeating questions slowly and loudly when she couldn’t answer because they were questions she didn’t understand and asked him to rephrase.
try to help your mental health by cycling, try to do something as opposed to nothing and very likely be in an even worse position medically/healthwise if you didn't do what you're doing and then get hammered not just by society but by the government agencies.
And yet you see massively overweight self inflicted types getting brand new BMWs and VW SUVs handed to them by the benefit system and still continue smoking, where is the incentive to get these people healthier when they can stay the same because currently they can remain the same and live a life of virtual luxury compared to some.
Where do you see this?
6 doors down from where I live unfortunately, 'Fat' Ricky the former drug dealer (though I have no doubts the late night callers aren't just round for late night snacks) recently exchanged his BMW for a nice shiny VW SUV. My neighbour who works her butt off was disgusted.
The guys daughter is okay, she keeps herself to herself, I remember when she was a sweet little girl when they were rehoused here, helped her dientangle her leg when she fell off her bike and too k her back home, but he never gave a shit about his kids and social services were in and out on a very regular basis. His son is a right 'merchant' who drives his own car like a twat, somehow manages to run a motor without a job.
Nonsense like this is part of the problem and the prejudice people with disabilities face every day.
Thats not how PIP, the higher rate mobility component or motorbility works. No one is handed a car. People who meet the criteria for the mobility component of PIP get a set amount of money to pay for transportation, as they have mobility requirements that limit their ability to use public transport. Those who get the higher rate (there are two rates) can lease a car from the Motorbility charity. There are cars motorbility do that are less than the benefit rate. BMW SUVs are probably not (although I haven’t checked the rates in years as I have not had need). They top up anything else from their own income (disabled people are capable of working you know...).
The problem with having a mobility limiting disability is that it can make exercise very hard. Just because someone is overweight and claiming PIP does not mean that is the cause of their disability, or impacts it at all.
Nonsense like this is a fucking reality sonshine, everyone knows the guys circumstances, his disability is being fat druggie freeloader, too fat, smoking and doing (not to mention dealing) drugs has caused his situation, it seems to me that it's simpler for the system to keep it that way so they don't have to take his kids off him and put them into care which will make it more costly.
But clearly you know the whole situation better than I do despite me living 6 doors down and people who knew him before they were rehoused here having spoken about his 'lifestyle'!
On “sonshine” (do you think copying mockney gangster talk makes you look hard on the internet?) I clearly know the benefits system much better than you, which is what your original comment was about, about “free cars”. Your just spouting the same old ablest “free cars” and “lazy disabled people”.
Perhaps you you do know one person who’s lifestyle has caused disability, or perhaps you know fuck all about this person other than other people prejudice. Perhaps your just another angry prejudice person the people in the article, me and other posters are talking about. Either way you clearly know fuck all about how PIP works. No one is “given” a car, and anyone who has made a PIP claim (and all of the evidence on benefit fraud) will tell you that people in recipe of PIP are in need of support, whatever the cause of their disability.
And how often do you socialise with this person? Speak to him about his condition? You do know that disability isn't always obvious, right? Maybe a hidden mental health issue is the cause of his addiction? Or are you just letting your predujices get in the way as per usual?
In one post he's a former dealer and in the next he's a dealer. If he is a dealer then is possible, just maybe, that that's what funds a new car?
Something is rotten in the heart of Merrie England.
That's terrible - shaming people for trying to get some exercise when they have difficulty with other activities.
Maybe something like a blue badge for cycles is needed.
This is even before the dwp gets involved- sounds like the first guy is suffering from the same thing that makes people leave stroppy notes on cars with blue badges ("well, you don't look disabled!")
I took it as being all about the DWP. I assume that is why people fear being seen cycling. After the birth of my first child the ATOS assessment changed dramatically and the comment we had from the person doing the assessment was “well if your managing to look after a child it can’t be that bad”. It made her feel like the choices were no PIP or social services being involved. Neither of which are appropriate, as her disability has no impact on her ability to look after our children (or her mobility for that matter. She just hates cycling).
I get that, but the story is about people being scared of others seeing them or taking photos, not the dwp actually coming to them and saying “oi, if you ride a bike you ain’t getting benefits!”. It’s the fear of interfering busybodies, egged on by the tabloids, just *thinking* that they’re a scrounge and not disabled enough and deciding to report them. Hostile environment.
Far better to foster a more supportive, inclusive culture. But that's not popular at the moment, the government and the Brexiteers (and other forces) have turned us on each other. Divide and rule. 'Benefits' has become a dirty word.
That sounds awful.
It's what 'we' voted for.
But I certainly did not vote for it. I never would and I detest this government, what the media does and what Britain as a country appears to have become.