Jury's still out on that one, I believe, but let's say give him the benefit of the doubt for the purpose of this game, it's a "who".

Yellow in colour, yellow in nature.

Well, you can put pressure on the Labour Party for starters. They may not be great, but they're still our better shot at getting the madness stopped or at least reduced. Labour IS slowly turning around (too slowly for my liking), and this is thanks to groups like DPAC, Black Triangle and Spartacus and others who are keeping up the pressure on them to see how badly this is affecting so many vulnerable. You can find DPAC here Spartacus here and Black Triangle here. They also have Facebook groups if that's easier for you. On the Atos side of things, there's "Atos Miracles", "Nurses Against Atos" and "Atos Kills", I don't have them bookmarked, but they're easy to find too. For very good informative blogs: http://www.greenbenchesuk.com/ (unashamedly left-wing, be warned!) http://tompride.wordpress.com/ (satirical, but still spot on!) http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/ Plenty more around, but this should give you plenty to read about for the next week or so, lol.

Marlon Brando

Ripping the car, the care, the independence, the pretense of equality, quality of life... need I go on...

I think it's too important to just be mentioned in passing, this is huge, and has such massive implications... both for disabled people's independence and for the motor industry! (Motability is after all the biggest lease company in the UK!)

That's not how it works; if you submit evidence, it's up to the other party, not the judge, to raise objections. For them to do so would be to suggest that you have deliberately falsified evidence, and they can't just say that just like that without opening a new can of worms for themselves. Remember, he who accuse must prove. If they accuse you of tampering with the recording, they'd have to prove it to the judge's satisfaction.

Please read the following linked post. From 50m to 20m for mobility element It is vitally important people should be made aware of this. The sneaky change of criteria from 50m to 20m means that a huge number of people who depend on their car for working, shopping, socialising and everything else able-bodied people take for granted and part of their normal life, will lose their main tool of independence. To give you an idea of what 20 meters represent, see below: upload pics or imagine this: unrolled. This is it. If you can walk, shuffle, mobilise beyond that distance, you can not qualify for the upper mobility element under the new criteria. And of course, they sneaked it in over the xmas holidays, with no consultations, hoping to get it set in the regulations and present all of us with a fait accompli.

CSA? WTF was I doing in the CSA forum? Must have missed a turn somewhere! Thanks, Antone.

You missed a bit, I take it that he has since received a renewal form from the DWP? The reality is that yes, the DWP can act on any tip-off to decide to re-evaluate someone's award, if they have a suspicion (no matter how it came about) that the lifetime condition may have improved then it's their absolute right to review the award. Whether it is the neighbour or not is irrelevant, really. Have you not heard of the Sun's oh-so-delightful "shop the scrounger" campaign? The fact is, regardless as to how it came about, these are worrying times for anyone with a disability, the change-over from DLA to PIP for over 16s to under 65s being the main one, the new criteria for mobility of 20 meters, etc... Looks like your neighbour had been caught in the storm and instead of worrying about it came about, he needs to prepare for how he's going to handle it.

Dracula?

Loving it.

And in case people are still confused about the covert recording legalities and surrounding: Covertly recording your Atos assessment by, well, me.

What, apart from the original post? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?336827-Announcement-ESA-claimants-now-have-the-option-of-having-their-WCA-recorded&p=4074446&viewfull=1#post4074446 dated 11/12.

Oh I don't know, doesn't that count as public service?

Yes, I think that's what Killer McVey said they would be set as in her statement the other day. I'll see if I can find the exact quote. There it is: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/newsroom/ministers-speeches/2012/13-12-12.shtml HTH

I used to get one sending me 15 letters at once every month, religiously. 15 envelopes. I think they got bored eventually, I haven't heard from them for months now.

Please tell me you're not a deity!!! (Big head, lol)

Some kind of alien, or mythic person (vampire, wizard, or something like that) from TV? Am I in the right area?

No need for a "last attempt", I got you loud and clear from your first post, believe me, you've not been exactly subtle, although rather disingenuous, time and again. It reminds me of DCAs when they try to coerce you into paying something you don't owe but they hope you'll never question it because their business model would then collapse. You even use the legendary "may" word.

I think the words you're looking for are "clutching at straws".

... all of which still doesn't go near the original question of "obligation" to pay an admin fee between 2 entities that don't have a contract binding them. Never mind. *sigh*

Now that is at last a sensible reasoning! ... although it doesn't answer the question as to whether they can then impose that fee on me. If it were me who had this type of business, I'd factor that possible cost into the fee I charge the person with whom I had the contract though. This way, if I ended up paying VAT, my costs would have already been covered so I wouldn't need to charge a fee to the recipient, knowing that not having a contract with them would be relying solely on their good will to pay up, if I didn't end up paying VAT on their behalf, then it would all be profit to my company.

That's not a fact, that's a website page on the Internet. Do you believe everything on the Internet? Have you never found pages that put up wrong info by mistake? Ooooh you got me there, I can't prove that I didn't get charged when I went to collect my stuff, silly me, I didn't keep the receipt from months ago in case someone on an internet forum decided that I would make somethign like that up, for reasons best known to myself presumably. Or maybe, just maybe, and I am just putting that one out there... there wasn't a fee apart from the VAT and their website is incorrect and so I paid the money I owed, said thank you very much and they said you're welcome and gave me my parcel, I said goodbye, they said goodbye and yes, what an attitude to have, kill them with politeness I say. Denigrate? You're the one who's just made up a story imagining that I must have been such a terrible customer that RM couldn't wait to get me out of their premises!!! And you accuse ME of denigration? Pot or kettle, much? As for the "evidence", like I said, it's not evidence, it's a page on the website. What, get away with not paying money they have no right to charge me? Gasp, horror. well, the world is due to end in a few hours, so fingers crossed, hey? Oh no. I quiver in fear. Oh no, hang on, I don't.

"a customer may use their own recording equipment, providing it meets the required standards and they have requested a specific appointment for the recording beforehand." "Unauthorised recordings "Atos Healthcare is happy to provide an audio recording of an assessment where customers make a request in advance of their assessment." " We will terminate the assessment if we become aware that an unauthorised recording is taking place." "We believe our staff have the right to work in a safe environment." " If any recording is used to intimidate staff " "or if their personal data is published on-line" " this may put their safety at risk." " In these circumstances the DWP will be notified and Atos Healthcare reserves the right to take appropriate action." Translation: You've got us, we know that, you know that, we're still going to try to lie to you about it, but we've been caught out and forced to retreat so often that by now we're desperate to back out with whatever shreds of dignity we can muster, so we'll still make empty threats and bluster, but really, we all know that you can record what you want as you want and there's b*gger all we can do about it except leave the room if we notice. And if that happens, we can't even threaten you that we'll do bad things to you like stopping your benefits cos that would be unlawful and so we're going to be a lot more careful this time and hope that you'll be too scared to notice. Well, I'd say that this is DWP/Atos well and truly spanked on that one. Well done, us! Small clarification: Should one covertly record their assessment, and the Atos person should happen to identify themselves in full, first name, surname, DOB, address, tel number etc..., and should one then decide to put it all out there on Youtube, then maybe there would be a case to answer for Atos to take "appropriate action".... which would be to get Youtube to take the clip down. That's it.