Incapacity Benefit Wrongly Stopped - Failed Medical

bestpud

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

(After editing out the emotive language).....

The reason there are more people on here who say the medicals are unfair is because we never hear from the (majority) of people whose claim went ahead with no problems!

Exactly! :T

bestpud

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

If there was a vote on this forum - you would lose

The point being - absolutely nobody is saying every test is unfair - just that there is a problem that you and 'friends' do not want to recognise.

I think everyone knows what the problem is!

And it's nothing to do with the benefit system... :rolleyes:

saucy77

I'm not going to get in on the debate of what is right and what is wrong, but I too failed the medical by a measly 3 points. I too suffer from depression and anxiety and when I got the letter saying that I had failed, I was beside myself.
But after speaking with someone (I can't even remember who it was now, due to my memory being affected) they did say that I had 30 days in which I could appeal.
So I phoned for an appeal form, and it took me weeks to get butt into gear and fill it in. Just thinking about the problem made me feel worse, and not doing it wasn't helping matters.

Anyway, whilst you are going through your appeal, they will still pay you the same money as if you're still claiming, and should you lose your appeal, then you will have to pay back any over payment made to you. If you win - then it's no more worries.

If you wanna share experiences, pm me.
I am a little shocked that you only needed 10 points for your medical however, mine was 15, and I scored 12.

Hope it all works out for you

healy

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

Heals - it is your opinion and that of a few of your 'friends' that the so-called ATOS 'medicals' and so-called 'independent tribunals' are fair - there are more people on this forum that say they are not

BTW: The very same 'friends' that thank many of your posts

Please see post 320, I have said the same thing but you do not listen to me.

shamrock64

Hi
Im new to the forum and thought id post this reply from mine and my partners experience of the atos medicals and claiming incap and dla.
Its well known that mental health issues is a grey area were benefits are concerned and my partner as claimed incap from sept 2004 due to anxiety and panic attacks and social phobia,and also agraphobia which as occurred and become worse of late.
His first medical was in 2005 and he was passed as unfit to work thank god because it was a trauma in itself for him to even attend i did of course go with him as he wont even consider going out of the house without me.The doctor did try to catch us out by asking the same question in various different ways but as i said all was well and then we thought he should claim DLA which he did in 2007 a doctor was sent to the house as is usual again this was traumatic as our house is his sanctuary and he hates people coming into it who he knows so of course some stranger asking questions was a complete waste of time.
Consequently he was refused but i realised after reading up on stuff that we had gone down the wrong path entirley saying he couldnt/didnt go outside because of his aggraphobia because apparently they dont look at that as needing support because he just isnt going out,stupid but I can see their point.
In June 2008 the dreaded medical appointment came again and this time we took the option of asking for the doctor to visit the house as it was the lesser of two evils really as my partner really couldnt face getting out in town and going into the medical centre.They asked for a fax from his doctor saying he wasnt capable of attending the centre and then they sent a dr out (sat morning ,,,,that must have cost)
I have to say he was very nice and couldnt understand why my partner had no help for his condition ie: councelling and when i asked if he was going to sign him as fit for work he said not at all so that was an acheivement again.
Anyway in July this year he applied for DLA again i filled his forms in myself the only help I had was from 2 emails off a kind welfare rights lady that i found on the internet it took me a good few days to fill them in and i read her emails and examples over and over again they are worth their weight in gold and this time instead of making a point of him not going outdoors i explained in great detail how he feels and behaves when he is outdoors and my god it worked!!!!!
He was awarded low rate mobility and medium care which now entitles me to carers allowance thank god so I no longer have to sign on and say Im seeking a job when really I cant because I cant leave him alone for very long.Btw no doctor was sent out this time for the DLA which I found very surprising but on saying that the welfare rights papers said you can say you dont want a doctor to come out as it would be of no benefit and just cause extreme distress (which it would)and I would have tried this tactic had a visit been suggested
To the OP dont despair like everyone said to me after we was turned down the first time its all about how you fill out the form and I have to agree at least in our case anyway it was.
thanks for reading and I hope its of help but it is proof that you can get DLA for mental health issues .

cit_k

healy wrote: »

An opinion is words a thank you is just a thank you.

I cannot unthank someone even if I wanted to . I do not support false information, I am trying to give a correct picture of tribunals, that the vast majority are fair.

You are one with the obsession it is clear for everyone to see, I am just giving the correct picture. If me posting a fact is making you think the opposite it is you that clearly have a problem. So to take this further if you now think tribunals are not fair that would mean that you should not have won the tribunals you have attended, you cannot have it both ways.

I am still not telling of my experience and it obvious that tribunals do deal with facts.

I was not referring to people who thank me I was referring to anyone who can see I am correct. You seem obsessed with thank yous as well.

That has not stopped you or others from qouting the old post and stating 'thanked in error' before has it?

Re - my thoughts about tribunals, I did state that perhaps things had changed... Ie now, more recent cases may not be as fair overall as I had thought... Plus, as with medicals, some are fair, some are unfair, it does not mean that because it is one way or the other that all will be... Time will tell if a change has occurred, as at present the balance of posts is more in favour of tribunals than against, but if more posts start appearing with bad experiences of tribunals then that would sway my thoughts, as would more posts posting success (which interestingly many, many people do post, as they have usually posted about the benefits being stopped, and come back in to let everyone know they won (or lost) the tribunal)


As for the 'thank-you's' evidence would suggest that you are more obsessed, as you and others thank more often than most, and in the most odd circumstances usually.

Im just pointing out by doing so, you are effectively devaluing your evidence, and giving more credibility to the opposite side...

cit_k

shamrock64 wrote: »

I have to say he was very nice and couldnt understand why my partner had no help for his condition ie: councelling and when i asked if he was going to sign him as fit for work he said not at all so that was an acheivement again.

Thanks for sharing your experiences, and I agree, its always best to get help from an advisor at all stages where it is possible to do so. Especially as the system is so complex....

One thing though, the doctor was being rather naughty by stating what he did, he is not the one that makes the decision, that is up to a decision maker, and the docs are trained to not give an opinion one way or the other, they are meant to explain they dont decide.

Congrats on it finally working out though, bet its a wieght of your minds.

healy

cit_k wrote: »

That has not stopped you or others from qouting the old post and stating 'thanked in error' before has it?

Re - my thoughts about tribunals, I did state that perhaps things had changed... Ie now, more recent cases may not be as fair overall as I had thought... Plus, as with medicals, some are fair, some are unfair, it does not mean that because it is one way or the other that all will be... Time will tell if a change has occurred, as at present the balance of posts is more in favour of tribunals than against, but if more posts start appearing with bad experiences of tribunals then that would sway my thoughts, as would more posts posting success (which interestingly many, many people do post, as they have usually posted about the benefits being stopped, and come back in to let everyone know they won (or lost) the tribunal)


As for the 'thank-you's' evidence would suggest that you are more obsessed, as you and others thank more often than most, and in the most odd circumstances usually.

Im just pointing out by doing so, you are effectively devaluing your evidence, and giving more credibility to the opposite side...

I can say thanked in error if I want.

There have been no changes to the way tribunals are run. There are going to be more negative that positive posts on this board for obvious reason see post 320.

I have not brought the subject of thanks yous up, you have therefore you have the obsession. The fact that I am thanked does not devalue my posts or give more credibility to the opposite side.

Oldernotwiser

cit_k wrote: »

Thanks for sharing your experiences,

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

alwayshavingago

Dear CIT_k and Garry_Anderson
I thank you for for your posts dismissing my advice on how to deal with problems IB/ESA, follow correct procedures, complain to MP etc absolute waste of time silly me - what was I thinking about all these years working to help others much of it in my own time.

All along I should have advised people to come on this forum and tell them to listen to you two bleating on endlessly about your own vast experience - me me me!!!

The post from Garry about his complaint to his MP says it all it did not help ME.

Well if enough people complain and take things forward raise issues it becomes a body of evidence that is difficult to ignore.

Garry your appeal was in the last decade for gods sake get over it! you have had your benefit ever since.

I know there are problems with the system in particular with Mental Health - but i do not believe this is due to corruption or conspiracy that is just scaremongering.

Take a look at http://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/index/campaigns/social_policy/briefings/br_benefitsandtaxcredits/what_the_doctor_ordered_

Although out of date that is how you raise issues and I am proud to say I contributed evidence to that report, it is reasoned and based on evidence. The DWP is a vast organization it has to apply the rules to a very diverse client base there bound to be problems, but I know from my contacts with them that it is full of people who genuinely work Hard and want to help people.

I do not think any one can argue with the Governments goal of 'no one written off' however with the introduction of ESA and the limited amount of time this had to settle in, I am concerned that the assessments are able to deal with certain groups of claimants -in particular mental health. The problem is certain conditions and terms are often abused fro example stress and depression both can at the worse be extremely debilitating and can make someone very ill, however it has become almost trendy to have stress and are common terms to use - leading to a watering down of the true effects of these illnesses. They must also be very difficult to assess in the Short and somewhat restricted PCA assessment.

I have never seen any post by you two that has given any advice on how to deal with a potentially/alleged unfair assessment other than its a big plot to have a go at people with mental health problems. Where is the advice, that you two must have from your vast experience, on how to deal with the assessment, prepare for appeal/Tribunal, what to claim in the mean time etc?

There is always the possibility that the assessment was fair and the claimant simply does not qualify there is never any discussion on this - what descriptors do you do you think apply/what points should you have, for example.

Is it possible to create a guide on here for people to read on how to deal with this particular problem, is ir called a sticky? That way people can read it then enter the debate if they want (have a stiff drink/take medication first)

people facing this type of problem would be best advised to visit the web sites of CAB/DIAL/Disability Alliance first.

I wonder how someone who is worried/anxious/distraught would feel viewing this thread - pretty hopeless probably.