Incapacity benefit suddenly stopped

healy

spring_chicken wrote: »

But the job centre know that I am unfit for work, so I would be lying, then knowing my luck I would probably get prosecuted for making a false claim, it really is a no win situation.

This would not happen you can claim JSA.

spring_chicken

I was told it wasn't an option, so I'm afraid I can't claim it. The Advisor already told me this. So I'm stuffed.

healy

spring_chicken wrote: »

I was told it wasn't an option, so I'm afraid I can't claim it. The Advisor already told me this. So I'm stuffed.

It is an option, you can claim it, the adviser was wrong. Others can confirm what I have said is correct. As I said before :
It may be possible to claim contribution based JSA if she has the right NI contributions but she would not be able claim Income based JSA as her husband works.

dmg24

spring_chicken wrote: »

I was told it wasn't an option, so I'm afraid I can't claim it. The Advisor already told me this. So I'm stuffed.

The Advisor was wrong. The DWP have deemed you fit for work, and therefore you are eligible to claim JSA. They are not going to investigate you for fraud when it is them that have said that you are fit for work!

As healy has said, it does not make much sense. However, that is the way that the system works.

Good luck with your appeal x

mouseymousey99

I seem to remember getting JSA & not having to actually sign on as I was covered by a sick note which exempts you from looking for work.

dmg24

mouseymousey99 wrote: »

I seem to remember getting JSA & not having to actually sign on as I was covered by a sick note which exempts you from looking for work.

AFAIK you are only allowed two periods of up to fourteen days within a year where this would apply (not sure if my timings are correct?).

mouseymousey99

oh okey dokey sorry must be me then (sorry), it was about 10 years ago and I had to keep posting sick notes for a month at a time.

SuziQ

I would love to know what proportion of appeals succeed and the cost of these tribunals. I suppose we only hear about the genuine claimants on here and there must be some who are claiming dishonestly but it must be such a costly system,plus of course the medical assessments are contracted out privately-I wonder if there is any action taken against the doctors who play people's points down,perhaps some have a worse record than others and should be taken out of the system as I bet the sucessful tribunals aren't funded by the company carrying out the original assessments!

mouseymousey99

You are right Suzi, I often wonder how much it has cost to 'recover' any money claimed fraudulently too and if they actually ever get any of it? Did you know one farmer also claimed government subs of over 9k last year, for growing 'set aside' (ie nothing)??
Who was it - well one Prince of Wales....I know way off topic, I'll get my coat....

stazi

SuziQ
If you do want to know how many appeals succeed, you could write to DWP HQ and ask them under FoI laws.

The PCA is a points based system, and no doubt is affected by a number of factors, such as-'good or bad day' for a customer on that day;examining Dr's experience;customer's responses to the questions;level of co-operation with the examination by the customer etc etc.

No system is perfect, if it were, there would be no need for the 'checks and balances' that the system appears to have such as- reconsideration by a JCP Decision Maker, independent appeal process, and reference to the Social Security Commisioner's on points of law.

The ATOS Dr or nurse- yes, the law now allows it, has to make a judgement on someone's capability within the 30 mins available to them. For example, one of the areas looked at is walking- but the Dr doesn't actually ask someone to walk 800 yards-it's a judgement if they could/could not, Another area is sitting,a person cannot be asked to sit for 2 hours in a 30min examination. It's judgement by an approved Dr/nurse at that time, on that day, on that person, with that incapacity.

Yes, the examinations could all be perfect, say, with a 2 Dr medical, both agreeing on the points scored- but that would be twice as expensive- with a possible saving with maybe no right of appeal. Yes, a lot of money could be saved with no independent appeal hearing needed.

As I understand it, only the Govt has a published wish to reduce the numbers on IB by 1m within 10 years, The ATOS contractors do not have a target, as I would imagine that would be unlawful and also politically damaging.