Incapacity Benefit Wrongly Stopped - Failed Medical

NASA_2

saintjanet wrote: »

EASY LIFE STYLE!! you must be joking,my husband worked for nearly 30 years before going on IB ,he was earning about six times more in work than he received in benefits,lost loads of perks and bonus.The dwp could even say he is fit now by changing the goalposts,if he was fit, several of my family run buisnesses and would employ him but he CAN NOT work,perhaps this is too difficult for you to understand,i hope you are never in that position.

I think you miss the point that ONW was making. Dont think for a second they are saying that everyone on IB is having an easy time.

nogginthenog

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I can't see why you should think that there might be even more people unable to work in a healthy western society with a reasonable health service! Since when have Britons become such a sickly nation?

I'm probably repeating myself but, under the Thatcher government, thousands of people were moved onto IB to fudge the unemployment figures; that was the real scandal! Obviously now there needs to be numbers of people moved onto more appropriate benefits and it's going to be hard for some of them who've got used to an easy lifestyle, but unfortunately it has to be done.

Their was also a record number of industrial accident in the Thatcher era, esp in the building trade.
Health and safty all but vanished also in this era.
Longer working hours and a doubleing of workload also came into fruition in this same era., due to smaller workforces. leading to accidents caused due to tiredness.
In europe working hours and retirement age, still stayed at a gererous level during the 60s & 70s
In europe,diet and meal times stayed constant, compared with the UK'S ever increasing American style diet, and food on the hoof.
In the rest of the world,sickness and old age,WAS the responsibility of the family, and kept mostly private.
This wa the start of the throw-away worker,,,No longer a human being..Just a price point for the accountants.

Oldernotwiser

saintjanet wrote: »

EASY LIFE STYLE!! you must be joking,my husband worked for nearly 30 years before going on IB ,he was earning about six times more in work than he received in benefits,lost loads of perks and bonus.The dwp could even say he is fit now by changing the goalposts,if he was fit, several of my family run buisnesses and would employ him but he CAN NOT work,perhaps this is too difficult for you to understand,i hope you are never in that position.

Most people aren't fortunate enough to be earning this sort of money or to have the possibility of working in a family business.

For someone who can only expect to earn the NMW in a pretty basic job, living on IB with rent and CT paid can be a very comfortable option indeed.

Not that it's relevant but I had to retire from a career on health grounds.

cit_k

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Most people aren't fortunate enough to be earning this sort of money or to have the possibility of working in a family business.

For someone who can only expect to earn the NMW in a pretty basic job, living on IB with rent and CT paid can be a very comfortable option indeed.

Not that it's relevant but I had to retire from a career on health grounds.

I had to give up a sucessful career that I loved, good pension, and about 150 thousand pounds worth of shares in order to live on benefits.

It should be pretty obvious I would not chose to do that - and would much rather have preferred to have loads of money in the bank, and either enjoy a job that got easier as time went by, or use the cash to run my own company doing things I enjoy, employing others and making even more money.

but life can be odd at times. Anyone can have a change of circumstances that is unplanned, and unstoppable.

Garry_Anderson

Originally Posted by Oldernotwiser
Surely we all want fewer people on benefits?

nogginthenog wrote: »

If thats right.........Then they could start by targeting the people who are not ill

It seems to me they would rather go after the mentally ill - go after them using ESA and ATOS 'medical' tests - they make nice easy targets.

Garry_Anderson

strawberry_cupcake wrote: »

the exact same thing that happened to the OP happened to me last year, it took 14 months to get to tribunal, and on the day the judge was biased against me, and although when he intereviewed me I answered enough questions (truthully) which would result in me receiving more points, he conveniently "forgot" to record those answers on his report, hmmmmmm, naughty, naughty, so guess what I failed ......again! Fair justice? Dont insult me, its a stitch up.

Thats it though, I wont reappeal, I haven't got the energy or the constitution for it now, I know when I am (unfairly) beaten. One day, someone WILL blow the whistle on this, and I for one, cant wait.

At my tribunal the 'judge' acted of behalf of the 'prosecution' because the DWP didn't turn up and I couldn't ask them questions - so much for independent tribunals - they also tried a stitch up by losing evidence - but I was expecting it and still won

cit_k

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

[/I]



It seems to me they would rather go after the mentally ill - go after them using ESA and ATOS 'medical' tests - they make nice easy targets.

Freud (the person responsible for the welfare reform paper) has stated the following things (he was labour but now switched sides to tory and is the shadow minister for works and pensions, so if the tories win he could be the real minister for it)

He is what labour based their welfare reforms on, and is now what the tories appear to be basing theirs on.

What lessons have been learned over the past 11 years?
That the focus ought to be on the 3 million on Incapacity Benefit not the 250,000 difficult cases on Jobseeker's Allowance.

So thats a pretty clear sign they are focusing on the sick/disabled before the hale and hearty.

But he is ok with people on income support as he said

Should income support be time-limited?
No, I'm not in favour of it. Telling someone, "Go and lie in the gutter and die," is something that I don't think society can do.

As for incapacity, his long term goal seems to be that no one should qualify for it, as he stated

What is the single most important policy that is needed?
To reactivate people on Incapacity Benefit and not allow a place for people where they're expected to be out of the labour market.

cit_k

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

At my tribunal the 'judge' acted of behalf of the 'prosecution' because the DWP didn't turn up and I couldn't ask them questions - so much for independent tribunals - they also tried a stitch up by losing evidence - but I was expecting it and still won

Apparently its very rare for the dwp to send a representative.

Just as rare, if not rarer (it may have never happened at all actually) for any atos examiner to be called into a tribunal for questioning.

edit to add -
ps - what sort of evidence was lost?

Garry_Anderson

The 'judge' for some extraodinary strange reason didn't have a letter sent from my doctor to DWP in their evidence - but I asked my doctor for a copy of it - from dealings with the DWP e.g. in their interpretation of evidence etc. - I knew what to expect.

bestpud

cit_k wrote: »

I had to give up a sucessful career that I loved, good pension, and about 150 thousand pounds worth of shares in order to live on benefits.

It should be pretty obvious I would not chose to do that - and would much rather have preferred to have loads of money in the bank, and either enjoy a job that got easier as time went by, or use the cash to run my own company doing things I enjoy, employing others and making even more money.

but life can be odd at times. Anyone can have a change of circumstances that is unplanned, and unstoppable.

Perhaps someone on that salary has quite a lot saved, or already has a decent house etc, but would still like a bit of money coming in so they can hang onto them as long as possible?

Someone earning that kind of money may be doing long hours, or have a highly stressful job, and perhaps wants to 'retire' sooner?

Whatever, the case, they are likely to have a better lifestyle in place, to enjoy while not working, than someone who has always earned the minimum wage.

Not saying this is the case for you, but can you see how it is not cut and dried (doesn't seem it is), and we cannot assume people wouldn't do this?