Permission given by those concerned in this article
They have request that this be blogged and that I help in making it go viral so I ask if you agree with what has been published here you too share, blog and retwit as this is a new low of Iain Duncan Smith and I for one am truly disgusted not only with his reply letter that did not even touch base with the issues raised he also chose to pass the buck this smacks of total incompetence.
The person this refers to is a BRITISH CITIZEN indeed she has lived here all her life, was born in Chingford LONDON and is a UK Passport Holder. She has worked here paid her taxes here, however this Govt want to send her to Holland.
The letter I will copy and paste below is a letter sent to Iain Duncan Smith by the concerned mother on the Sun, 22 Sep 2013 it goes into greater detail that I cannot type because it is so upsetting:
My mum’s reply:
Unfortunately, despite my agreeing that my daughter , Laurel Duut and I would leave her problem to be sorted out by the Court, rather than troubling you any further, I am sorry to say that further confusions occurred.
If you recall, I had an appointment to see Mr Iain Duncan Smith in 2011 because I am in his constituency, and have been here since 1966 raising my family, teaching and running a specialist bird shop, and also my daughter Laurel was born, went to school and raised her own family in the same constituency.
I came to see Mr Duncan Smith, in the hope of having his support for her and her husband. It was a very difficult time for them both as Peter had become very ill and so was unable to work and to continue supporting Laurel, either physically as her carer or financially, and to add to their problems, they were told that he should return to Holland, as he was not considered elligible to live here. He had been supporting her since 2002, when all her benefits were stopped – even her child benefit for her sons. This is still a major problem and to this day has not been sorted out. She has also had all her National Insurance stamps removed, and she had worked all her life, until she herself became a carer for her son and father, and was too ill herself to work.
Peter took her and her son back to stay initially in his parents’ home in Holland and was able to get work there and to support them all. Laurel was unable to work.
In 2007, the DLA rules changed and allowed expats, unable to work, to receive some of the DLA while abroad, and so Laurel applied and was turned down.
In 2008, with a promise of work in the UK for Peter and accommodation available near their sons in Suffolk, they returned to be near them and to advise them. In 2009 Laurel was awarded DLA while living in the UK minus the first 6 months, which was eventually awarded to her after a battle with the authorities.
Then in 2011 Peter became ill, and the nightmare began. Basically they were refused all normal benefits and Peter was also told that he did not have the right to live in the UK any more. They both starved and Peter died at the end of the year. It was all headlines in the newspapers.
Then in 2012, Laurel’s application for the 2007 DLA , and her National Insurance stamps and was taken to Court and she won her case. She waited to receive the payment and stamps, and then heard that Mr Duncan Smith had appealed twice in Court to have the payment stopped and had the appeal refused.
I have found this very sad, that after appealing to Mr Duncan Smith in person for help in sorting their benefits out, he has chosen to actually fight the Court’s decision to award a benefit that would have helped her, and of course, having her National Insurance Stamps returned is essential.
Since writing to you, recently, there has been a very upsetting incident. Laurel phoned me when she received a letter from The Administrative Support Centre. It said that the recipient was to complete the Appeal application and return it. She was very distressed indeed because she has taken her case to Court and won it. She is now waiting for the missing money to arrive together with her missing National insurance stamps. She was very confused and when she read the letter to me, I realised immediately that it was a mistake and so she rang The Administrative Support Centre and was told that I was correct and the application was intended for Iain Duncan Smith’s department and that he had applied for a further Appeal to take place and that he was aiming to have the decision made by the Judge, stopped and also that he wanted Laurel sent out of the country. The Administrative support centre apologised profusely for their error in sending Mr Duncan Smith’s papers to Laurel and told her to ignore the Appeal application completely and they assured her that another one would be sent to Mr Duncan Smith instead.
So now, there is a plan for my daughter Laurel, born and bred in Chingford to be forced from the UK, in addition to not being awarded the DLA owing to her or receiving her National Insurance Stamps !
I cannot imagine why all this is taking place. I can only assume that a very, very big mistake has been made and that you have confused Laurel with somebody else?
Please look into this at once and explain just what and why all this is happening.
To add to all this, Laurel is very ill and attending Addenbrookes Hospital and undergoing operations on her arms and spine. She ( and I ) does not need this harassment. She is still mourning the death of her husband who died starving and knowing that our Government wanted him out of the UK, despite all that he had done working here and supporting his wife and children.
She needs the support from your department and from Mr Duncan Smith that I requested
Iain Duncan Smiths reply:
I think many of you will like my believe this is disgusting the poor woman has been through enough already and my heart goes out to her, she is at her wits end and want her day in court with Iain Duncan Smith.
I for one hopes she gets that as she really should not be fighting now as her case has been won already.
I think you will agree after reading this that Iain Duncan Smith is not Human and is devoid of any empathy or motality
I now bring you an update to these tragic set of circumstances which is just a snippet of how corrupt this Government is indeed I believe they think they are above the law and any other person would be in Contempt of Court.
Below is a further letter from L J Duut’s Mother who is a constituent of Iain Duncan Smith:
My mother has just sent a response to her letter as follows: 01/11/2013
Dear Ms N*** and Mr Duncan Smith,
I have received a letter from Mr Iain Duncan Smith, dated 28th October 2013, stating that it is in reply to my email of 22nd September 2013, that was sent to Ms Jo Nash.
The letter is totally out of context and does not relate to my letter in any way.
I am now attaching an emailed letter of authority from my daughter giving me permission to act on her behalf in this matter.
I am also sending the original letter again , in the hope that you will be able to re-read it and reply appropriately.
Laurel does have DLA and we do not need the advice you have provided, regarding how to claim it. However, her application for it in 2007, for 2007, was rejected, when she was in Holland, and since she returned to the UK the European Court of Justice overturned the decision and she has been waiting for the allowance to be paid to her. This is one of the matters that you are contesting with a number of appeals in Court. You are also withholding her National Insurance Stamps from her and attempting to have her removed from the UK.
This is all very frightening for me and her sons, their partners, her grandchildren and the numerous friends she has in the UK and around the world.
You are my MP and you are meant to support me. However, I feel intimidated and completely let down. Laurel’s MP is obviously unable to oppose your court actions.
It is interesting that you have written that ‘No one, including Ministers, can interfere with the decision-making process.’ – but you have!
I wait to hear from you urgently.
Below is the Tribunal Court Case Judgment papers which Laurel has won:
In the granted appeal document above in paragraph two note the word again JURISDICTION just why has that came up again, as it has already been proven that the Appellant has JURISDICTION and is a UK Resident with a link to the UK i.e being born here.
Furthermore more just why is Iain Duncan Smith appealing a Tribunal Court Decision made nearly a year ago surely that should have been done within 28 days of the decision made not 279 days after.
There appears to be a motive why Iain Duncan Smith wants Laurel out of the country and why her National Insurance Stamps as well as Benefits stopped clearly she is in the way of something perhaps this holds the answers:
My thanks to Laurel for bringing this to my attention.