Skip to content

Chair

April 13, 2013

What a complete and total fool I am.

When we moved in to our flat, it had a very cheap PVC three piece suite. The 3 seater sofa covering was split and on the day we moved in, one of the support workers (a featherweight) sat on the 2 seater sofa and went straight through it. I knew that neither of them would last long with Steven. But a couple of months earlier, back in the marital home, we’d brought a new sofa bed. So, I paid my wife for that and we had it installed in the flat the same day. It has served Steven well and has withstood several meltdowns but is no longer up for the challenge.

Both my landlady and the letting agents have told me, that as I rented the flat “furnished”, if I chose to replace any of the furnishings, the landlady can claim the new furniture when we move out. That has always seemed a bit unfair, as she has not been willing to replace the damaged furniture, nor do we have anywhere to store the old furniture.

So, I have been telling myself since Steven received his compensation that there is no point in buying him a new sofa as we would have to leave it behind when we’re evicted. But of course, I can replace the sofa bed because it belongs to me.

I’ve been looking at sofas that could hold the whole of Chumbawumba and their heavier pets. They are pretty expensive but have the durability factor.

At the same time, I’ve booked Steven’s summer holiday. It’s a lot cheaper than Center Parcs but we’ll still have to pay for the support workers and the car hire.

The upshot being, the damages have dropped below Hillingdon’s magical figure that excludes people from social housing.

It will be interesting, in the week in which they’ve done Steven’s mental capacity assessment to become the tenant at our current flat, to see what Hillingdon make of that. What barrier will they put in the way next to force their agenda through?

Watch this space

Advertisements

From → Social Care

2 Comments
  1. Yvonne Taylor permalink

    Mark as you are financial deputy steven has already been deemed as lacking capacity to understand matters such as a tenancy so why are they assessing his capacity you have the power to make decisions on his behalf

  2. Because they’ve got it wrong again Yvonne! I did try to point this out but ignored again. I think they were conflating the mental capacity assessment with the best interests assessment, which shows they’ve already decided what they consider the best interests to be. At best, it’s another mistake. At worst, it’s another attempt to destabalise Steven. He’s been a bit wobbly since they did the assessment – he didnt understand it but his instincts tells him something is in the air.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: