Disabled man who tried to claim new bed using John Lewis list used to determine MPs' expenses told price is 'a bit high'

By Daily Mail Reporter
Updated:


John Lewis list for MPs expenses

Rejected: Joseph Lee's application for a bed from the 'John Lewis List', from which MPs and MEPs expenses allowances are decided, was turned down because it was too expensive

A disabled man who tried to obtain a new bed by taking advantage of the 'John Lewis list' used to decide MPs' expenses was turned down because it cost too much, the High Court heard today.

Joseph Lee was told the cost of a new bed on the list was 'a bit high' and he was only entitled to £200, compared to the £1,000 available for MPs.

The 64-year-old, from East Ham, suffered spinal injuries while working in the building trade and was seeking a High Court challenge over the limits on state funding he was entitled to as a disabled person.

Mr Lee said he had applied for disability awards for several household items, relying on the so-called 'John Lewis list', which the Parliamentary Resources Department used when considering whether to authorise MPs' expenses claims.

The list of the maximum amounts MPs can claim for 38 items, including £750 for plasma televisions and £1,000 for a new bed, was revealed to the public for the first time in March last year.

He said: 'The question I ask and want answered is why am I and the rest of the 59 million citizens of this country treated differently from the 646 persons elected as MPs where help from the public purse is concerned.'

Mr Lee, who is registered disabled, has had three operations on his back and relies on a walking stick to get around, added: 'I apply to the public purse for a bed and am awarded £200.

'When one of the favoured 646 MPs apply they are awarded £1,000 for the same article. Why?'

He was also awarded £205 for a carpet for his sitting room and bedroom only, while MPs were entitled to over £1,800 on floor coverings.


Mr Lee told Mr Justice Holman, sitting at London's High Court, he was refused funding for other items of furniture available to MPs.

He described it as 'discrimination at its worst' and asked for permission to seek judicial review against the Department for Work and Pensions.

Mr Lee said: 'No 646 persons should be treated better than the other 59,940,000 people who make up the population of this country. It is morally indefensible.'

Rejecting Mr Lee's application, the judge ruled the issues raised by him were matters for Parliament and not for the courts.

The judge observed that Mr Lee began his legal action at the beginning of the year, well ahead of the current furore in the press and media over MPs' expenses.

The judge said he had 'anticipated with remarkable foresight' the political debate currently taking place, but the courts could not enter that debate.

Later Mr Lee vowed to fight on, saying: 'I will go all the way to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg if I have to.'

Most watched News videos