Many thanks Antone. It's been difficult trying to find a definitive answer. As you've confirmed why, I can't understand why the DWP didn't explain in their letter of a fortnight ago, when they should have notified me as soon as the DLA ceased last August. My CAB advocate, who I've not been able to contact for a week, however, assures me that having been in receipt of DLA for 24 years (middle care component + low mobility rate) stands me in good stead to have the PIP decision overturned by the Tribunal panel. As well as my medical records from 1987, when I was first referred for neurosurgery for epilepsy, I also have a supporting letter from my GP and an SAR to the South Coast Ambulance Service who have provided 14 incidents of them attending my home and in public around my home area. Thanks again Antone. With kind regards, Will

Hi All, the main crux of my post is to ask if anyone knows why the DWP just simply ceased the Severe Disability Premium? In February 2017 the DWP confirmed my entitlement of SDP together with ESA, Disability Income Guarantee and Limited Capability for work for work (support group). Two weeks ago I received an identical letter from DWP stating; "We have looked at your claim again following a recent change. This is because of: a change in money coming in. There has not been any change, to any of my entitlements, at all. The last, previous contact I had from DWP, before Feb '17, was a notice, dated August 2016 to inform me that I failed to be awarded PIP. I had previously been in receipt of DLA since June 1992. Only the tightening of the criteria of PIP and my failure to take medical evidence to the ATOS assessment caused the failure of any PIP award. I went through 'Mandatory Reconsideration' within the 1 month time limit but, because an SAR to the Hospital Trust, for my medical notes took longer than 40 days, which prevented me from appealing within 30 days, the CAB are supporting a Tribunal Appeal. I'm only waiting for a trial date. It just seems odd that the SDP of £62.45 has been ceased which has drastically reduced my income? Kind regards, Will

Hi Sali, thanks for your reply and kind supportive words. As my initial post reveals I began my quest for the truth in September '05 and will come back with updates to help others beat the system. It's heart-breaking to now learn that there are many that have fallen by the way when they've not had the tenacity to pursue their case, or run out of funds. The issue of my late Darling's medical notes being destroyed is of no problem. My Solicitor simply requested all medical notes last January as an exercise to see if they differed from the original set that I obtained in January 2006. Because I scanned every 317 notes to the hard-drive, before allowing the first Solicitors have copies, I was able to print all notes again from the PC. When my current Solicitor accepted my case I firstly sent a CD of all medical notes, the Healthcare Commission's Independent Reviews, the Ombudsman's report and my independent medical expert report. You are correct that medical notes are only held for 10 years but only by a GP. An NHS Trust can legally destroy a deceased patients notes after 8 years. My greatest grievance, after unnecessarily losing my late wife, was the 9 years, so far, to reach conclusion. Nobody should have to endure years of unnecessary prolongation of a complaint. According to other complainants I've had an unusually supportive MP whose secretary has commented that, should my case be made public, it should be a wake up call to NHS Trusts complaints departments that their days of relying on complacent lying to complainants are over, when we are able to communicate, and gain evidence from the internet, to nail and bring those responsible to account. I owe tremendous thanks to Janet Tracey's family for pursuing the legal issue of Do Not Resuscitation notices that recently upheld that a legal duty to inform patients with capacity whether a DNACPR order has been placed on their notes and whether they have any right to be consulted about it. http://www.leighday.co.uk/News/2014/June-2014/Landmark-judgment-in-resuscitation-case This has given my case the right to include Article 8 of the Human Rights Act where we were deprived the right to respect for private and family life. Not as severe as Article 2 where the Trust failed to preserve, or protect the right to life. I hope it's not too many years before my next update? Kind regards, Will

Hi Sali, you said "keep going" and I still am. As Geoff said "it can be a long road" which I never expected. Since my last post in 2009 a Solicitor finally took the case on in November 2012 and has issued the defendant Trust with 12 charges for a wrongful death. The Trust are still in denial and have raised the fact that I'm beyond the 3 years limitation period. All evidence is within the years of correspondence that they deliberately stalled their responses to expire the limitation period. It's a usual tactic the NHS complaints dept. are known for. Probably thinking they're untouchable there is no limitation for "gross negligent manslaughter". My late wife was terminally sedated by way of the Liverpool Care Pathway when she was not terminally ill. The Consultant surgeon had misdiagnosed her multiple pulmonary emboli as lung cancer. A few words of warning: If you have even an inkling that something has gone untoward in someone's healthcare for God's sake don't seek media attention before obtaining ALL medical notes. Before a reporter can print, or broadcast, your concerns they will need to interview the defending Trust which will give them a red light that a formal complaint will forthcoming and they will lose, mislay, destroy or "doctor" any incriminating evidence. Though I practiced what I preach I wasn't prepared for the following corruption. A large London office of Solicitors, who said I had no claim, advised that once I obtained the medical notes and if I believed a claim was still warranted, forward the notes to them for a second appraisal. Which I did. When they returned the notes in an A4 envelope I simply placed them in an office desk drawer because I had previously scanned all 317 notes to the PC's hard-drive. Eighteen months later I accidentally deleted 2 notes and had to access the hard copies from the drawer only to discover that the solicitors, or shysters, had retained (stolen) 100 of the original notes. On serving the writ to the Trust the aim of requesting all medical notes 8 years later was to determine whether the Trust would supply an identical set of notes. Sadly, but without concern, the Trust have stated that all of my late wife's notes were destroyed. I don't take fools lightly and intend to teach the NHS a lesson. A lesson that might include advice I was given as a lad, to "never let the right hand know what the left is doing", "always play your cards close to your chest", "never volunteer information" and when necessary "fight fire with fire". It's sad that today's world has become so corrupt and surprising that those authorities who think they can roughshod us mere peasants can't realise that when we can share and inform one another through social networking and forums, their days of relying on past complacent lying are over? Best regards, Will

Hi All, just to clarify that it's worth challenging. It's been resolved. I rang Santander (0800 056 6066) after finding; http://www.mybank.alliance-leicester.co.uk/logged_out/termsconditions.asp £500 minimum monthly funding not applicable to Premier 21 and Premier 50 Current Accounts but these accounts must still be funded, within 8 weeks of the new account being opened. All charges have been cancelled with agreement to close the account. Ironically it was the same collections dept, but a different operative, who consulted her manager and agreed to refund the £184 charges that solely consisted of monthly underfunding charges. Bill

Hi All, before I throw £184 away on charges. I've just received a call demanding that I clear the balance accumulated solely by under funding charges. In Sept 2009 I threw £2500 in an A&L account just to receive £100 for opening the account and 5% interest. I withdrew the majority for a funeral expense and the account lain dormant since. Santander graciously credited me with £50 overdraft to pay the under funding and now todays call from their collections dept want £184. I havn't time to scour the forum, as I've just been told that I'm now incurring daily charges, to see if others had a success against Santander's theft that can influence my fight or do I relent and pay under duress. Kind regards, Bill

Tables turned – your chance to shop the DWP 15 June 2010 Dear Will, In this newsletter we’re asking you to make sure the blame for much of the increase in the harassment of disabled people is placed where it belongs – at the door of the DWP and its ministers, with their constant campaign of vilification against sick and disabled claimants. The Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has begun an investigation into whether public bodies are fulfilling their legal obligations to prevent disabled people from being harassed. If you think the DWP are failing in this duty – and actually making things much worse - email EHRC and tell them so, your details will not be made public. Email: [email protected] And please, let other people know about this enquiry – the more people who contribute the harder it will be for the EHRC to ignore the DWP’s role in hate crimes. If you do contact EHRC, please consider posting something on our free blog to encourage others. There’s also more information and links on the same blog page at Tables turned - your chance to shop DWP and BBC. Staying with the DWP, we have a mole’s eye view of the misery that employment and support allowance (ESA) is causing inside Jobcentre Plus and a leaked email that reveals that the DWP is in a panic because of the large numbers of GPs who are wilfully or incompetently failing to complete the new fit notes correctly. There is a question mark hanging over the legality of benefits decisions as a result and it’s a story that, until now, has been kept from the press and the public: Leaked email shows DWP fit notes panic (This article is members only) We also have the first coalition statement on when current incapacity claimants are to be transferred to ESA: Transfer from IB to ESA: coalition timetable latest Plus a growing question mark over those four page DLA renewal forms that we’ve been warning members about. Why is it in the public interest for claimants to be kept in the dark about their future use? Read more in DLA short form – what are they hiding? (This article is members only) We also have a full list of DWP 0800 numbers that are free to call from most mobiles. Many thanks to the member who sent us the list, which they received in response to a Freedom of Information Act request: Full list of free to mobile DWP 0800 numbers Finally, we’ve had lots of good news posts in the forum lately, below are links to some of them: Success with DLA first time, A Big Thank You !! ESA Success....YESSSS! Another heartfelt THANKS to B&W DLA tribunal success Good News Decision changed - appeal cancelled ESA appeal I do hope you find these posts cheering – if the server lets you open the links, that is. If it doesn’t please do call again later, we really are trying to get it permanently sorted. Good luck, Steve Donnison © 2010 Steve Donnison. Benefits and Work Publishing Ltd. Company registration No. 5962666 You are welcome to reproduce this newsletter on your website or blog, provided you do so in full. This message was sent from Benefits and Work Publishing Ltd, PO Box 4352 , Warminster, Wilts BA12 2AF, United Kingdom. Regards, Bill

DLA short form con update plus keeping ESA after losing appeal 04 February 2010 Dear Will, We have an update on the four page DLA renewal form - and are definitely advising people to treat it with enormous caution, given the feedback we've had. Moving on to employment and support allowance (ESA), the latest statistics for both claims and appeals make very dismal reading indeed, with almost 7 out of ten claimants who have an assessment being found fit for work and fewer than 4 out of ten winning their appeals. Not that losing your appeal necessarily means you have to stop claiming ESA. The confusing mess that is the ESA regulations, combined with the increasing delays in administration, is allowing some claimants to claim ESA again immediately after losing their appeal against being found fit for work. This is happening even though there has been no change in their condition, as we explain. The DWP are taking advantage of the backlog in administering ESA wherever they can, however. We have a copy of guidance issued to decision makers this week to ensure that, where there has been a delay in medical assessments, the DWP pockets cash that should be being paid to claimants. This week we also get our first look at the new "fit notes" that will replace sick notes from April. We were left completely under whelmed by the idea that a few tick boxes are sufficient to ensure a gradual and safe return to work for people with serious health conditions. Equally under whelming was the discovery that RNID are quietly proposing to axe the casework team that, over the years, has built up unique expertise in helping deaf claimants get their benefits. RNID's reason for doing so sounds like the kind of corporate-speak that used to be the sole preserve of the private sector, but is gradually taking hold in parts of the voluntary sector. On a cheerier note, we have the tale of the claimant so fed up with what he regards as the poor standard of medical assessments that he flatly refused to have another one if he couldn't tape it. In the end he got his medical cancelled and his incapacity benefit renewed. Please don't try this yourselves? you'll almost certainly end up losing your benefit. But isn't it comforting to know that, at least occasionally, utterly foolhardy stubborness can face down even Atos Healthcare and the DWP? (edit)

Dear Will, It’s a start, but nowhere near enough. Health secretary Andy Burnham has said that he has ‘heard the concerns and worries about disability living allowance’. As a result, he has announced that: “I can state categorically that we have now ruled out any suggestion that DLA for under-65s will be brought into the new National Care Service.” Good news indeed . . . for some . . . for the moment. But definitely not for the one and a half million people who depend on AA. Nor for the for the three quarters of a million people aged 65 and over who receive DLA. Not even for the 400,000 DLA claimants currently aged between 60 and 64, many of whom will have reached the age of 65 by the time labour’s proposed National Care Service is introduced. Because, of course, DLA is not just paid to people under 65. You have to make your claim before you are 65, but you can then go on claiming indefinitely if your needs do not change. Unfortunately, many organisations who should know better seem to have forgotten that – perhaps just as the government hoped. Because Mr Burnham made no secret about why he made this announcement: he wants to shut people up. He said in his speech, given at a conference in Harrogate on 22nd October and also published on the Big Care Debate website: "One avenue I do want to close down, however, is the debate and controversy over Disability Living Allowance.” In that ambition, he seems to have succeeded, at least so far as some disability charities are concerned. Immediately following Burnham’s speech, Disability Alliance sent out a press release stating that: “. . . the Disability Living Allowance (DLA) benefit will not be affected by Government plans to merge some benefits with social care funding . . . Andy Burnham's announcement will reassure disabled people that DLA is safe – for now at least.” The Disability Charities Consortium told the media: "This represents a real victory for disabled people who felt very strongly that the DLA should be retained and made their collective voice heard on this issue. " Macmillan Cancer Support also issued a press release saying that: “Whilst we are pleased the Government has said Disability Living Allowance (DLA) will not be used to meet the shortfall in social care funding, we remain deeply concerned that Attendance Allowance (AA) is still under threat.” But that isn’t what Andy Burnham said at all. He said DLA for under 65’s is not being considered. This was echoed by Yvette Cooper, the DWP secretary of state who told a meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group on ME on 21st October that DLA for people of ‘working age’ is not under review. It was also made clear by Burnham that there will be no transitional protection of existing awards for current claimants. Instead, ‘an equivalent level of support' will be provided by your local authority. Burnham’s announcement seems to have had the desired effect, however – the ‘debate and controversy’ over DLA appears to be over as far as some disability charities are concerned. Yet, in a little over two weeks time the deadline for submissions on the green paper ends. It’s vital that the case for saving DLA for all claimants is still made. Only now there is a real worry that not only have the disability charities relaxed, but also that Burnham will claim that because 3,000 submissions to the Big Care Debate were made before his announcement that DLA for under 65s is safe, they should mostly be discounted. If you don’t want the government to get away with closing down ‘the debate and controversy over Disability Living Allowance’ there are things you can do. Contact disability groups you have a connection with and warn them that they still need to respond to the green paper in relation to both DLA and AA. Respond to the Care Green paper yourself, again if necessary, making it clear that you are aware that DLA for under 65s is not under consideration and giving your views on axing AA and DLA for people aged 65 and over. http://careandsupport.direct.gov.uk/greenpaper/execsum/ Email: [email protected] Rouse people to sign the No 10 petition, which is gathering real momentum again: it now has over 19,000 signatures and is at number 8 out of over four and a half thousand petitions on the site. Not bad going for a petition that has been running for less than two months. http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/AttendanceA/ Tell your MP what you think or, better still, go and visit them and tell them face-to-face. One final thought. The revelation that the government is considering slashing the income of 2.5 million older disabled claimants was made by Andy Burnham in a keynote speech last week. The subject of that speech? Outlawing ageism in the NHS. Good luck, Steve Donnison Please feel free to forward or publish this article, which is also available online at: http://www.disney.go.com/mickey//news/latest-news/1118-dla-saved--for-some Benefits and Work Publishing Ltd www.disney.go.com/mickey/ Company registration No. 5962666 POST YOUR NEWS Finally, remember that you can post your news in the Benefits and Work forum, if you’re a member, at: http://www.disney.go.com/mickey//forum?func=showcat&catid=13 and/or in the free welfare watch forums at: http://welfarewatch.myfineforum.org/index.php You can also keep up with news about opposition to the green paper at the Carer Watch campaign blog: http://carerwatch.com/cuts/

Hi, I just did a search on "Crohn's DLA" and there's someone on MSE forum who's had the same problems as you. Have a read at; http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=25584375 Then if necessary, PM or post the OP for advice. My main search was at; DLA Crohns - Google Search This is one reason I began a thread on the Green Paper currently going through the Commons, where there are proposals to abolish AA and DLA. Don't worry, because there has so far been public revolt. When it comes to filling an application in, don't forget to describe his condition on a bad day. Kind regards, Bill.

Hi MsWeatherwax, that's extremely kind of you. The hospital management only have theirselves to blame for this escalating to it's current position. I'm honestly of the old school that if they had have just said, "Sorry, we messed up", that would have been the end of the matter. Even the kids have agreed, that if Mom's cancer came from smoking, there's no room to complain. When I submitted the initial complaint, the complaints manager replied stating, "because the Coroner's Officer is not directly employed by the NHS, any complaint levied towards him falls outside the remit of the NHS complaints scheme. I later learnt that a seperate complaint would have to be made to the Home Office or Jack Straws Ministry of Justice. Thankfully, the Acute Medicine Manager addressed the issue. When I complained that I was unallowed to request a Post-Mortem, he stated that the hospital's Legal Services Manager liaised with my partner's "nearest living relatives", (her adult children in America) AND that they declined permission for a PM. After I emailed their first response to them, they were outraged, because no one from the hospital had contacted them. When I brought this to the complaints manager's attention, his next reply stated that my partner's brother rang the hospital on 23rd Sept to seek a PM. Her brother categorically states that he never did. When I escalated the complaint to the Healthcare Commission, the case manager asked for copies of communication from the legal services manager, because I claimed that no contact had been made. The hospital managers must be short of brain cells, because the correspondence was dated 21st Sept. They couldn't even fake a letter with the correct date. I've just let them carry on digging a bigger hole? Us more mature citizens possess the hindsight that it'll all come out in the wash. I honestly feel sorry for the nursing staff and doctors that are governed by people without any medical qualifications. Let alone, other complainants that either lack the stamina and tenacity to survive this ordeal, or are not able to put pen to paper. Kind regards, Bill.

Hi Daniella, would it surprise you when I say I don't have a solicitor? I havn't needed to use my legal insurance, as I've been unable to engage a solicitor, because they have all said that I would not be able to prove "causation" (she was an ex-smoker). Solicitors then state that, "lung cancer has a poor 5 year prognosis" and any compensation payment, if proven, would be minimal. With resources available from the internet, I've conducted everything myself. I have been able to contact the Professor in anaesthesia, who whistleblew on the Bristol Royal Infirmary baby premature deaths who has condemned the anaesthetic drugs used on my late partner. The past 3 years have included "local resolution", 2 Independent Reviews and the Healthcare Commission. An application is now before the Health Ombudsman. To summarize as brief as possible; My partner elected for a day surgery biopsy of a neck mass and a bronchoscopy. Post-op she suffered a bronchospasm and had an emergency tracheotomy to open her airway. She then spent 3 days in ICU, came back to the nursing ward and told of the "Tongue Cancer" diagnosis a week later. A fortnight later she passed away. Can anyone tell me of an instance where someone has passed away from any form of cancer, within 3 weeks of the initial diagnosis? Three days later, I received a call from a Coroner's Officer stating that I could collect the death certificate. He added, "whilst I have you on the phone, I can confirm death will be recorded as Lung cancer". I questioned, "Why, when she was diagnosed with Tongue cancer". His reply, "for the purposes of death, I have to state where the cancer originated". Then, alarm bells rang when, bizarrely, he stated that, "because I was only her partner" (although I am documented as Next of Kin) "I would not be able to request a hospital/family Post-Mortem". I obtained her medical notes and discovered that, 10 months earlier, a "lung shadow" had been documented. Following local resolution and two independant reviews, the Healthcare Commissions "clinical advisers" have assured us that all CXR's show no sign of lung cancer. Including the last CXR taken 3 weeks before passing away. The cancer only happened to be diagnosed following an admission for day surgery biopsy of a neck mass that began in March '05. The clinical advisers have failed to answer my reasonable request of, "how did cancer metastasize (spread) to her neck in March '05, when the final CXR, dated 6/09/05, showed no sign of cancer?" Scrutinizing her notes, I discovered C Difficile documented a week before passing and Morphine was used for pain relief, when she was asthmatic with COPD. I've told the Health Ombudsman, point blank, that I suspect that I was refused a PM, to avoid a pathologist discovering the true extent of the cancer and morphine toxicity. The reason I've never sought publicity, is because I've seen reports of too many cases that people have done so and before the case either goes to print, or broadcast on the news, the hospital management have had time to lose any incriminating evidence. I hope my last paragraph gives "food for thought" for other's that may receive a similar experience. And remember, fight fire with fire. Bill.

Hi Sali, I didn't want to upset anyone, because I could not accept Geoff's opinion when I read his remark of "leaving it all to the lawyers". But, I can now support what Sali has stated. It was the worst experience I ever made. "Nepotism" is rife between the Medico/legal profession. I lost my wife after 3 weeks of being diagnosed with "Tongue" cancer. I tried 14 firms of solicitors, none were interested, because the Coroner only recorded "Metastatic Lung Carcinoma" on the death certificate. Lung cancer has a poor 5 year survival rate and solicitors rate any compensation payment would be cost prohibitive with that of fighting the case? I then took the only course available of gaining access to 317 of her medical notes. After them being returned to me by one of London's largest Med neg solicitors, I put them away in the office desk until I bought a new PC and accidentally erased one of the notes, I got the A4 envelope out and only 200 notes were there. Thank God I scanned them before letting the parasite solicitors see them. I wasn't initially looking for compensation, because she had been a smoker for 40 years, but the grief and cover up has made me want blood. And I don't mean from their path lab? To substain my claim, please have a read at; Doctor facing disciplinary action over drug prescriptions - Telegraph and any further links on Gosport cover up. Controversial NHS scheme 'designed to improve care' - Telegraph Regards, Bill.

You've got it in one Bookworm. I was just the messenger for the previous post, but can see straight through them. Why do they naturally think that we were all born yesterday or we're as green as the grass? The other anomaly that I picked up was, Phil Hope answered, "there are NO plans to axe DLA if I am in office after the next election" What chance have CONSERLabourVATIVE got of being re-elected? "CONSERLabourVATIVE" is my definition of Labour in Conservative clothing. Regards, Bill.

Hi All, according to Steve Donnison (Benefits & Work) campaigner, it was stated by Phil Hope (Care Services Minister), at yesterdays Labour Conference, that DLA would not be abolished. I'd just like to add that he was most magnanimous having just repaid £42,000 in MP's expenses for household items for his London home? Dear Will, In what may represent a dramatic victory for campaigners, Care Services Minister Phil Hope yesterday told a reporter at the Labour Party conference that DLA is not under threat by the care green paper. According to the Disability Now website, Phil Hope, when asked if he would abolish DLA after the election, replied: “No. All the models that we have done have not included DLA. But if people were to make a case to integrate DLA into a comprehensive system, then I'm very happy to hear that case and have those arguments. "DLA is not under threat and people can be very happy". For more details and our reaction, visit: www.disney.go.com/mickey//news/latest-news/1110-dla-is-not-under-threat----be-very-happy-says-government-minister We know that some people will claim that the minister’s comments are evidence that campaigning to save DLA was unnecessary. It’s a claim, however, that can only be be made by ignoring such as the following. 1 Earlier this month the DWP press office said in relation to whether DLA would be scrapped: “It depends on what people say in the consultation. We need to see what people say when they respond.” 2 The same minister who is now saying DLA is not under threat wrote to MEP Liz Lynne just a fortnight ago stating that: “. . . this is a consultation exercise and no final decisions have been made about which disability benefits might be involved, or how they would be affected.” 3 The same minister also refused to rule out the possibility of DLA being axed in an interview earlier this month with Disability Now. 4 Last month CPAG claimed that it had received assurances from ‘senior sources’ at the DWP that DLA was not under threat. Just four days later CPAG revealed that it had “subsequently been contacted by the DWP who have said that no decisions have been taken as to the future of DLA whilst the consultation is ongoing.” CPAG then went off to lobby the Department of Health on the issue. 5 For almost two months national charities such as the MS Society have tried, but failed, to get clarification from the government as to whether DLA would be affected by the care green paper. 6 Just last week, David Behan, the Director General of Social Care at the Department of Health, published a blog post on the Big Care Debate website clearly trying to reduce the flood of hostile responses. He could have easily done so by saying outright that DLA would not be affected by the green paper – he didn’t. The reality is that, if the government have now stepped back from an attack on DLA before the care consultation has even ended, it is because of the literally thousands of angry responses on the Big Care Debate website, the thousands of signatures on petitions, the torrent of angry letters to MPs, the motions before the Scottish and Welsh assemblies and the growing pressure from disability charities who were themselves under enormous pressure from outraged claimants. It’s because the focus on the single issue of benefits is fast becoming a public relations disaster for a green paper signed by no fewer than six secretaries of state. Above all, if there’s been a change of heart, it’s because you have fought so effectively to protect the benefits of disabled people. Here at Benefits and Work we don’t know if the fight is yet over for DLA, but we do know for certain it’s only just begun for AA. Good luck, Steve Donnison LATEST DLA AND AA THREAT ARTICLES CPAG admits DLA is not safe CPAG admits DLA is not safe DLA threat website tries to stem hostile responses DLA threat website tries to stem hostile responses Scrapping DLA is an option confirms DWP Scrapping DLA is an option confirms DWP Is the Big Care Debate being nobbled? Is the Big Care Debate being nobbled? Scottish and Welsh assemblies campaign for DLA and AA Scottish and Welsh assemblies campaign for DLA and AA No 10 DLA and AA petition needs you No 10 DLA and AA petition needs you “DLA is not under threat . . . be very happy” says government minister ?DLA is not under threat . . . be very happy? says government minister Please feel free to forward or publish this email. Benefits and Work Publishing Ltd www.disney.go.com/mickey/ Company registration No. 5962666 © 2009 Steve Donnison. All rights reserved.