I/B stopped.............help

healy

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

More spin from you - latest figures show an average 44.265 pass and 55.735 fail i.e. claimants are around 25% more likely to fail.

My experience *proves* that there are actual *systemic faults* with the tribunal process - why do you pretend that you don't understand?

I am not a Spin Doctor, I am just stating the facts. Claimants are not 25% more likely to fail, your Maths is not correct.

Your experience shows that on rare occasions things may go wrong, which can be corrected further down the line. Your case is an exception, I know this for a fact. I understand perfectly well that the majority of cases are handled correctly. You are just one person, this is hard work.

NASA_2

I'm more interested in whether Garry has that awful haircut displayed on his 'skilful' website:rotfl:

Garry_Anderson

healy wrote: »

I am not a Spin Doctor, I am just stating the facts. Claimants are not 25% more likely to fail, your Maths is not correct.

Your experience shows that on rare occasions things may go wrong, which can be corrected further down the line. You case is an exception, I know this for a fact. I understand perfectly well that the majority of cases are handled correctly. You are just one person, this is hard work.

Check your calculator: Approx 56 fail 44 pass = 56/44 = ?

BTW: The only thing exceptional about my case - is I know how and why the Tribunals are biased against claimants and that they break the rules e.g. The AO should have answered my questions within fourteen days (03152) - indeed they didn't answer them at all.

Fact: there are *systemic faults* with the tribunal process.

As to "further down the line" - are you saying there is a tribunal to apeal against the appeal tribunal - how come we have no record of its pass rate?

All this time the stress almost killed me - and you think sick people to keep fighting past the corrupt Tribunal system for their rights - even if it kills them also.

Garry_Anderson

ESA wrote: »

I'm more interested in whether Garry has that awful haircut displayed on his 'skilful' website:rotfl:

Sorry - that's when I was in hospital after my operation went wrong - it hadn't been washed for a while.

I would have washed it had I known that it would be used as a source of amusement

healy

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

Check your calculator: Approx 56 fail 44 pass = 56/44 = ?

BTW: The only thing exceptional about my case - is I know how and why the Tribunals are biased against claimants and that they break the rules e.g. The AO should have answered my questions within fourteen days (03152) - indeed they didn't answer them at all.

Fact: there are *systemic faults* with the tribunal process.

As to "further down the line" - are you saying there is a tribunal to apeal against the appeal tribunal - how come we have no record of its pass rate?

All this time the stress almost killed me - and you think sick people to keep fighting past the corrupt Tribunal system for their rights - even if it kills them also.

Tribunals are not biased against appellants, you are wrong again.

There were errors in your case, YOU are just ONE person, this does not happen to EVERYONE.

I would imagine you already know but if there is an error in law a further appeal can be made and then the RARE errors are corrected.

The tribunal system is not corrupt, you are paranoid, I think it is time you had some help with your problems, I do not mean to be rude but you are clearly delusional. I have never heard of anyone dying as a result of a Tribunal.

Garry_Anderson

healy wrote: »

Tribunals are not biased against appellants, you are wrong again.

There were errors in your case, YOU are just ONE person, this does not happen to EVERYONE.

I would imagine you already know but if there is an error in law a further appeal can be made and then the RARE errors are corrected.

The tribunal system is not corrupt, you are paranoid, I think it is time you had some help with your problems, I do not mean to be rude but you are clearly delusional. I have never heard of anyone dying as a result of a Tribunal.

So - I was correct that claimants are around 25% more likely to fail.

These are *systemic* errors e.g. ITS chairman acting on behalf of the opposition and case not being found in favour of claimant when AO doesn't answer important questions needed to win case - contrary to the rules ( 03152).

As to being "delusional"; I am perfectly objective and well-reasoned thank you - e.g. having proven the Financial Services Authority "lack integrity" with official complaint found in my favour.

I have documentary proof from them, should you not believe me.

BTW: Any errors which relate to fact which could win claimants case would not be allowed appeal - only an error in law.

NASA_2

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

Sorry - that's when I was in hospital after my operation went wrong - it hadn't been washed for a while.

I would have washed it had I known that it would be used as a source of amusement

You must be the unluckiest guy alive, ITS got it wrong, NHS got it wrong, mortgage provider got it 'wrong' etc. etc. etc.

You'll know for the next time at least. Wash hair before being photographed and think twice before using such a pic as a failing propaganda piece.

honeyD

soozandrew wrote: »

hello all...........some advice needed please....

after attending a medical the doctor gave a completely different set of answers to the ones i gave (i must of had the same Dr as the rest of the people on here in similar possitions lol), the ATOS Dr, if thats what he was at all, didnt seem to care too much about my physical condition (i have a neck condition that results in constant pins and needles in my left arm and have restricted movement in neck shoulder and arm and have had this for two years and am in the process of seeing a neurologist, i also have m/h & alcohol issues) and am according to the DWP as fit as a fiddle so they have stopped my I/B etc etc.
i have since learned that MY doctor has filled in and returned the form they sent but MY physio didnt recieve any form of request about my condition.....so the DWP/ATOS have not got the full information about my medical history, can i request (i would say demand but i want to treat them with kid gloves so they might be forthcomming) a reinstatement of my benifits and attend another medical due to the incorrect proceedures being followed??

any advice greatly recieved, cheers andrew

Hello, I am in the process of doing this myself for the same reasons (wrong answers noted etc). When you submit your first appeal letter I would suggest you put as much information as possible with it. I made the mistake of just sending a draft that I had written for me b y a legal person and I have found out Ive failed my appeal and now can choose to go to a tribunal if I want to. I just have no idea what I am supposed to do, or submit, I have absolutely no idea. Im finding this whole thing very stressful too, one step forward two steps back comes to mind.
I sent my appeal letter back in February and I have only heard from them at the weekend so be prepared for a wait! And then you only have 14 days to submit your replies! Seems wrong somehow that we only get 14 days yet they take months.
Good luck with your appeal.

healy

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

So - I was correct that claimants are around 25% more likely to fail.

These are *systemic* errors e.g. ITS chairman acting on behalf of the opposition and case not being found in favour of claimant when AO doesn't answer important questions needed to win case - contrary to the rules ( 03152).

As to being "delusional"; I am perfectly objective and well-reasoned thank you - e.g. having proven the Financial Services Authority "lack integrity" with official complaint found in my favour.

I have documentary proof from them, should you not believe me.

BTW: Any errors which relate to fact which could win claimants case would not be allowed appeal - only an error in law.

You are only talking about YOUR case, this does not happen to EVERYONE. The vast majority of people have a fair hearing.

You are clearly not objective or well reasoned as you have proved in this thread and many other times on this forum.

I know about errors in law.

Garry_Anderson

ESA wrote: »

You must be the unluckiest guy alive, ITS got it wrong, NHS got it wrong, mortgage provider got it 'wrong' etc. etc. etc.

You'll know for the next time at least. Wash hair before being photographed and think twice before using such a pic as a failing propaganda piece.

You don't believe documentary proof (e.g. from FSA) because it doesn't conform to your own little world view - what a sad person you are