Tribunal about my ESA

cit_k

NASA wrote: »

I was thinking about stopping all the lies - like people who claim disability benefits and officiate as linesmen at the same time - or those that claim disability benefits and work a 40 hour week on a busy construction site.

See, it works both ways, there are liars on both sides, neither is more justifiable than the other yet on here you would think it is a one way street.

Tape the claimants, tape them for a week before they arrive and a month, covertly, after they have had the medical, record it on the fullness of evidence. That should be an interesting excercise.

I would like all employess of the DWP to be covertly recorded at work (audio and video), and their actions monitored and scrutinised by an independant body. Should prove interesting. Although it would surely lead to many being fired for simply rubber stamping decisions, giving wrong advice,lying etc etc....

The genuine staff, who work hard, could be rewarded with promotions, and the wasters who destroy peoples lives given the boot.

Cant see it happening though.

As for medicals/claimaints - claimants are already covertly recorded on a regular basis if their is a complaint raised by *anybody*, yet despite the countless reports of examiners lying, not ONCE has their been a covert undercover investigation in them.

Very one sided.

cit_k

NASA wrote: »

I wholeheartedly agree, yet, it doesnt stop them claiming.

I think a spell in jail for those that lose appeals would be a good deterrant.

I think a spell in jail for the examiners and decision makers who are found to have falsely accused someone of being fit for work would work wonders.

cit_k

NASA wrote: »

No. That would be unfair. DWP and ATOS are beyond reproach IMO.

You have got to be a troll..

alwaysonthego_2

cit_k wrote: »

You have got to be a troll..

He certainly is not, our much loved NASA.

NASA_2

cit_k wrote: »

You have got to be a troll..

Do the good people on MSE thank a troll this (Thanked 1,243 Times in 737 Posts) many times?

I'm not a troll - I just tend to express a contrary opinion.

Garry_Anderson

atomicsheep wrote: »

Garry you are still talking about your experience, this is not the case in all tribunals

Duh - the chairman of so-called independent tribunal can act against you on behalf of the DWP in all cases when DWP representative (be they adjudication officer/ decision maker or whatever they now call themselves) don't turn up i.e. they are not independent.

atomicsheep

can but dont

Garry_Anderson

Duh - the chairman of so-called independent tribunal can act against you on behalf of the DWP in all cases when DWP representative (be they adjudication officer/ decision maker or whatever they now call themselves) don't turn up i.e. they are not independent.

can but dont

You are not that dumb - if the judge in any criminal or civil case could act against you on behalf of the prosecution or plaintiff when they did not turn up, you would rightly say the system is corrupt and biased against defendant.

absolutebounder

atomicsheep wrote: »

Garry you are still talking about your experience, this is not the case in all tribunals

Of course its not the case in all tribunals if any. Its just the case in Garry's conspiracy theorist little mind.He is worried someone might notice he is fit for work (though unemployable:rotfl:)
Benefit is an entitlement not a right they have tribunals because we have a health service that tax payers kindly fork out for to help people get better. Some people abuse the system and claim rather than work and keep harping on about things that happened ages ago.
Wake up and smell the roses. The benefits system costs more than the receipts from income tax. Soon there wont be the scroungers charter because there is no money in the kitty. If you can work a computer well enough to write the sort of twaddle garry comes up with you can work in an office.

Garry_Anderson

Bounder - as I wrote to your pal Sheep; You are not that dumb - if the judge in any criminal or civil case could act against you on behalf of the prosecution or plaintiff when they did not turn up, you would rightly say the system is corrupt and biased against defendant.

Funny how numerous doctors and experts didn't believe I was well enough to work - including the DWP Adjudication Officer who wrote; "The Adjudication Officer has judged that because the work proved injurious to Mr Anderson's condition, it should not be treated as therapeutic work" - though admittedly this was to deny my legal *right* to entitlement.

As you point out - though you seem to use tinted glasses - this comes from tax payers who pay into system for the sick and unemployed and when things go wrong for them - as I paid into for many years and it went wrong for me.

BTW: Your medical diagnosis is rubbish - no surprise - I worked on computers when it "proved injurious" - there is more to work than making comments - not that you would know that