Failed ESA Medical!!

robpw2

seeya23 wrote: »

just book my ESA Medical i have a mental illness now im worring like mad thinking im going to get turn down

just be yourself
be truthful
don't say things you think they want to hear
dont second guess them

describe an average day etc

dont worry if they fail you , you can appeal

robpw2

ESA wrote: »

Nothing that is said on here will change what happens at the medical. Its all opinions and conjecture.

and people personal experience of these medicals .

Garry_Anderson

Originally Posted by Garry_Anderson
It is not about having the 'courage' - it is about being well enough - but you know this.

The appeal is to *review* the evidence - so it is the 21 that is correct - therefore the initial so-called 'medical test' was a travesty - not simply an injustice - but a wrongdoing of fraud against the poor claimant - taking away their legal entitlement.

We *know* for a *fact* that all these cases we hear on this forum point to something being seriously wrong - I state again; that is a fact.

ESA wrote: »

Hmm, are tribunals incapable of getting things wrong?

If not then surely they can get it wrong in both directions.

We hear about a handful of cases where things go wrong - we also hear cases where things have gone swimmingly for the claimant involved. Those cases point to something being terribly right.

Err.. reviews *scrutinise* the evidence - so it is invariably more right - and 21 points out - come off it - that 'doctor' was seriously fabricating the persons medical condition.

There is clearly enough evidence to *prove* that there are 'doctors' fiddling the tests so claimants will fail i.e. defrauding them of legal entitlement.

Ames

But things on here could affect someone's medical. If they think due to 'advice' on here that the chances of passing are slim and that 'professionals' don't think they should be claiming in the first place, then they're likely to be more worried and stressed in the medical, which would in turn make them more easily flustered and confused and therefore would affect the outcome.

NASA_2

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

There is clearly enough evidence to *prove* that there are 'doctors' fiddling the tests so claimants will fail i.e. defrauding them of legal entitlement.

No there isnt.

NASA_2

Ames wrote: »

But things on here could affect someone's medical. If they think due to 'advice' on here that the chances of passing are slim and that 'professionals' don't think they should be claiming in the first place, then they're likely to be more worried and stressed in the medical, which would in turn make them more easily flustered and confused and therefore would affect the outcome.

There arent any professionals on here that I know of:huh:

Garry_Anderson

ESA wrote: »

No there isnt.

This is one of the reasons why I write long sentences.

Should have wrote: Err.. reviews *scrutinise* the evidence - so it is invariably more right - and 21 points out - come off it - that 'doctor' was seriously fabricating the persons medical condition - there is clearly enough evidence to *prove* that there are 'doctors' fiddling the tests so claimants will fail i.e. defrauding them of legal entitlement.

So - you admit that the tribunal is invariably more right - but you think the so-called 'doctor' who took 21 points off the ill person - leaving them with absolute zero - was some sort of 'accident' - yeh sure

The rest of us know that it was no 'accident' - we have heard of similar happening many times before.

robpw2

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

This is one of the reasons why I write long sentences.

Should have wrote: Err.. reviews *scrutinise* the evidence - so it is invariably more right - and 21 points out - come off it - that 'doctor' was seriously fabricating the persons medical condition - there is clearly enough evidence to *prove* that there are 'doctors' fiddling the tests so claimants will fail i.e. defrauding them of legal entitlement.

So - you admit that the tribunal is invariably more right - but you think the so-called 'doctor' who took 21 points off the ill person - leaving them with absolute zero - was some sort of 'accident' - yeh sure

The rest of us know that it was no 'accident' - we have heard of similar happening many times before.

esa would from what i understand of her posititon be at risk in her work if she said anything other than what she has said

NASA_2

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

This is one of the reasons why I write long sentences.

Should have wrote: Err.. reviews *scrutinise* the evidence - so it is invariably more right - and 21 points out - come off it - that 'doctor' was seriously fabricating the persons medical condition - there is clearly enough evidence to *prove* that there are 'doctors' fiddling the tests so claimants will fail i.e. defrauding them of legal entitlement.

So - you admit that the tribunal is invariably more right - but you think the so-called 'doctor' who took 21 points off the ill person - leaving them with absolute zero - was some sort of 'accident' - yeh sure

The rest of us know that it was no 'accident' - we have heard of similar happening many times before.

Garry, your so set against the system because of some perceived wrong doing against you, you are quite incapable of being impartial.

The DWP are usually right, The Tribunals are usually right, but that in no way means that they cannot be wrong.

septemberblues

ESA wrote: »

Garry, your so set against the system because of some perceived wrong doing against you, you are quite incapable of being impartial.

The DWP are usually right, The Tribunals are usually right, but that in no way means that they cannot be wrong.

So 90% of IB or ESA claimants are well enough to work? Seriously? "The DWP are usually right" you are surely joking. It is cheaper for the government to have 90% of claimants receiving JSA, rather than IB or ESA.

Do you really, honestly believe that the 90% who fail the ESA medicals are fit enough to work?

ESA, up until a while ago your replies were unbiased and very helpful, and you seemed like someone who actually cared. Now you come over as a completely biased person who believes everything he is told at work! You need to get a grip mate.