Tuesday 5 February 2008

KVN Forum meeting this evening.

The KVN Forum is the patient group giving a voice to HIV patients from the Chelsea & Westminster Kobler, Victoria clinics & Nkosi Johnson Unit.

It is the patient forum which represents me as a patient within it's patient base.

At the meeting held this evening as the "DLA Review" was on the agenda I attended for the first time mainly to contribute to this subject. I am grateful to the forum for allowing this discussion. Also it allowed members to put a face to this blog.

Further more, such was the feeling, that the KVN forum. Hopefully will make this a main agenda issue/topic for another meeting. Thanks.

If you are a patient at any of the aforementioned clinics you can join the forum from their website. Even if you cannot attend the meetings you can still contribute to your care via this forum.

A question was raised by a fellow forum member about when the change was made to the award from " For Life" to "an indefinite period". There was also confusion over whether this was a pilot still or an ongoing process.

Under the post "Various acts of Parliament" the Welfare Reform & Pensions Act 1999 (C.30) Clause 67. Sets out the change from "for life" to "an indefinite period."

For details on the review see the special rules report from the Disablilty Living Allowance Advisory Board. . Note this will download a "pdf" postscript file. Provides the background to the review.

Of course I could not post following the previous entry from my co-author with out mentioning the excellent result that gives some hope to the rest of us.

Result ?

I just heard from a fellow patient at Wharfside to say that DWP have reviewed his DLA and left it intact.

He was incredibly worried about this and was one (of many?) who've been receiving extra psychological support and medication since he got the review letter a while back.

But at least this indicates that if you still qualify it looks as though the DWP are not being as harsh as they were during the Benefit Integrity Project ... or at least the adjuicator in this case was.