Income Support, DLA(PIP) & Atos - Story, Advice & Information

jayboi2005;44490680
The doctor i seen was caring, understanding and empathetic. She did not set out to trick me or write me off nor was she my friend! However i was allowed a decision of DLA based on her report. I just felt i had to post after reading all the bad it ha to be known its not always the case.

Well all I can say is that you were one of the very lucky ones.
Let me just quote a sentence out of an ATOS report of mine that was completed by a doctor in respect of a claim:

"I am not aware of Lithium being used to treat mental illness....He claims that he became ill **** but it was not until 4 months later that he saw a Psychiatrist! In my opinion, this man is not suffering from a mental illness and consequently there is no basis for the claim."

Now anybody that is anybody knows what Lithium is prescribed for - mental illness. The drug (one of many) was prescribed by the Psychiatrist. And it took 4 months from when I asked for help at my GP's to getting to see the Psychiatrist.

Obviously I was denied the benefit. With a report like that, there was never going to be any hope of a claim being submitted again and it being successful. That report goes back to 2004!!!

Ironically within the next 6 months I had been sectioned twice! No I have never had a mental illness nor do I have one now. Yet I've been dragged back into the CMHT today for further assessment.

Doctors!

StinkerPinker wrote: »

I find it difficult to believe any doctor would admit to not being aware lithium was used to treat mental illness. If the HCP really WAS a doctor and put that in writing, I would think you would have a case against him/her for incompetence. Next stop the GMC fitness-to-practice committee!

Thank you. I know! That was one of many drugs that I was on. If he was a doctor? I presume that I can't actually disclose his full name on here, but yes I am now looking at the report - it is a 6 page BI118A form (for the IIDB claim), which seems to be the form that the doctor filled in for me at an assessment and then had me sign it at the bottom to say that what he had written was the truth. (I wouldn't have known what he had put on the form before I signed it, it was pushed in front of me and told to sign here) On page 1 he has written that I said that I was on Amitryptyline 50mg 4 times a day + Lithium 800mg a day amongst other things.

On Page 6, part 9 he has written his report and at the bottom he has signed it as Dr J Cha***n. He was at the Canterbury Medical Centre.

That report is still held in my files and will be used against me again if ever I submit another claim. Why? because I signed the document without being given the time to read it and not being able to take in what it actually said.

This was 9 years ago, and in all that time I have not made any re-application. Reporting him - a bit late now I think.
I never appealed against that decision or the contents of the report because of the above in that I couldn't very well call myself a liar after I had certified that the report was true!
This is also true in that I did not renew my DLA entitlement either because of this report and haven't claimed that benefit either since.

Oh by the way the previous two assessments for IIDB were fine and awarded me the full benefit at 80% disabled as well as being awarded HRC & LRM for DLA! All benefit payments ceased after this report was compliled.

This problem over this report is the reason why I have posted a thread about information on exactly what can the DWP use (report wise) for one benefit against a claim for another including ESA.

wild666 wrote: »

If they can try and use a report against you then you can also contest that report as not being fit for purpose, if they bring it into the open as a previous report, even if they don't name that report, then you are legally entitled to question the validity of any report that isn't in your favour no matter how old the report is

Yes I agree. But when that report bears my signature that I was told to sign by the assessor (ATOS) as being a correct and truthful account of what I had said, including his comments and that I accepted them, I think I would be hard pushed to now say that I felt coerced into agreeing the contents of the report by signing it.

I don't know about other benefits, but the the way the IIDB assessment is done is that the claimant is required at the bottom of page 1 to confirm the accuracy of the report, before it goes to the decision maker. Have a look at the form yourself (BI 118A) and you will see what I mean. It leaves no room to argue if the report is flawed or not - I confirmed that it wasn't at the end of the assessment process.

This is very similar to being asked to sign the ESA assessment as being truthful, factual and honest. Then trying to argue why you had been found fit for work.

formaldehyde_perfume wrote: »

I went for an ESA medical and wasn't asked to sign anything on the day. The only thing I signed was my ESA50 which was written by me, in my own time, months before ever having any contact with ATOS.

... And yes, my ATOS experience was a poor one too, but I wasn't asked to sign anything. In fact, everything is now noted on a computer system.

Likewise with my ESA50! But for some unknown reason when you apply for IIDB and when you have your medical, the assessor writes down (or should) (on form BI118a) your explanation word for word, of how the accident happened, what injury you sustained, medication taken and medical opinions given. The assessor then continues to fill out the form and writes his opinion on the back page (page 6). You are then handed the completed 6 page form and told that you must sign and date it to demonstrate that the contents are a true and accurate assessment of the condition/illness/disability. He assures you that he has put everything down as you have said it and that there is nothing untoward in it, other than what has been discussed.

Sitting there you either take the form, read through 6 pages of notes/opinions etc before signing it (that's if you are fit enough!), or like me, sign the thing trusting that the assessor has been honest with you.

The only time you get to really digest the report is when (and if) you ask for a copy of it after you have failed the ATOS assessment.

Bit late then to find out that what has been put in the report is not exactly what you thought had been written. You can't very well argue that the signature isn't yours - you are stuffed!!!

Is this going to be the way forward with ALL assessments, for ALL benefits to be carried out by ATOS in the future?
It will certainly cut down the number of possible appeals!!

Or maybe we should refuse to sign until we have had the chance to read the document fully? Can't see that being acceptable to either ATOS or the DWP. Claimants taking away the medical assessment and possibly not returning it or arguing the toss about some of the contents before they sign it.

I can't see a copy of the BI118a on the internet and don't know how to show my copy of it on here - sorry.

formaldehyde_perfume wrote: »

In the bit I quoted, you implied that a signature was required at the ATOS medical for ESA, I was saying this is not the case.

However, in reference to the piece I have quoted here, this is one of the 'lucky' parts of being dyslexic, people are far more willing to give you time and or a copy of something if I explain myself. In that situation I would have said ' I am dyslexic. I need to either be given 3-4 hours to read this information back myself, or have half an hour with someone I trust to read it back to me so that I know exactly what has been written. Then, if everything is satisfactory, I will sign it' That is the only way my signature goes on anything.

Looking back it is easy to see your mistakes, but I have learnt that people think, because you are disabled, you are a push over so through experience I have found that I need to be firm with my tone of voice and not to be fobbed off. I still make mistakes (for instance, not getting the name of the idiot that told me I wasn't elidgable for an adapted property because I wasn't over 55) but even for things like consultant appointments, if I don't know what is going on or I am not happy with the person then I am quite willing to make a nuisance of myself until I understand or until I am dealt with respectfully.

Thank you for that and I am sorry that I confused the issue over ESA.

Maybe then that when anybody claims IIDB they should mutter 'Dyslexic'!

What I can say and I stand to be corrected by someone that actually works for the DWP on here, is that you would not be allowed to remove the report as it stands at the moment and that you WILL sign the document there and then as that is one of the conditions of the claiming procedure.
Whether there has ever been a case where a claimant has refused to sign unless he is given access to independent advice I don't know. All I know is that I was placed under great pressure to comply by ATOS (the assessor) at a time when I was nervous as it was and in pain which meant that I just wanted to get out of there.

What I do know and can say, is that this report was used in my last DLA claim against me, which was more or less at the same time. That, as I have already said, was over 8 years ago. 8 years of not being able to believe that I would have hada good chance of recovering my lost DLA & IIDB! 8 years of lost benefit payments!
Even now I am shi**ng myself over whether I should make a new claim for both benefits.

It's not fair, it's not right that people are being forced into signing these types of documents to secure a claim and then find that they are used against you for years to come.