Amputee's anger as helpline price soars

Amputee Sylvia Brookfield has ripped out a round-the-clock helpline from her Westergate home in disgust at a price rise of about 13 per cent.

Mrs Brookfield said she could not afford to pay the inflation-busting increased cost for the Arun Lifeline service from next month. Arun District Council is upping the annual fee from about 180 to 205.93. The monthly charge is rising by 5.02 from 46.46. These surges in costs compare to official inflation rates of about four per cent. Mrs Brookfield (73) said the increase would hit the district's most vulnerable residents. 'My pension has not gone up by anything like 10 per cent,' she explained.

'My fuel bill has increased and my water rate has also gone up. I have to look after myself and I just don't have the money to pay any more. I am disgusted by the price rise. It is a big jump. Because the people who have this service are elderly, we need more quicker than anyone else. When I fall over, I have to crawl around on the floor until I can find something to lever myself up on.'

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

She said she would have to ring 999 to summon help in spite of the paramedics being busy, rather than contact Arun Lifeline, if she became stuck because of her injury.

'I am not the only person who needs help, especially with the ageing population we have around here. There will be a lot of people who think like I do on this issue but who can't speak for themselves. I will speak up for them. The council has to take heed of us,' she stated.

Rosvara Avenue resident Mrs Brookfield, who also suffers from asthma, has been a member of Arun Lifeline for the past seven years. She had her left leg amputed above the knee after a car crash on the A27 in 1995.

Another Arun Lifeline member, Mary Bradley (93), of Fontwell Avenue, Eastergate, added her voice to the protest.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

She said: 'I would like to know what justification the council have for increasing the cost of the Lifeline services by about 10pc.

'There is no VAT charge on this service and it is for elderly people who are disabled and live alone. The council should think again before targeting this very vulnerable group of people.'