Incapacity Benefit Wrongly Stopped - Failed Medical

Garry_Anderson

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Then you're talking about writing people off by saying they should stay on benefits. Some of us are talking about fighting for people's right to work!

As Cit-k said, "There is a possibility Jesus may return and grant a mass miracle to 1 million on incap, but I seriously doubt it".

You don't fight for peoples right to work by throwing them to the wolves whilst failing to get *real* medical advice from a doctor who specialises in the claimants problems.

The ATOS 'medical' is hardly a real medical - it is the pretence of one to get a million people off benefits - clearly many of them too sick to work i.e. they are being defrauded of their legal entitlement.

cit_k

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

[/I]
2. What about claimants right to question the evidence e.g. how a decision was made and what was done to verify - how can lack of due care and negligence be demonstrated if nobody answers these questions.

One thing I do find quite disturbing, is the fact that no welfare rights advisor, member of the public, member of any charity, MP or Politician has ever been able to get hold of LIMA (the software used by atos at assessments), and neither has it ever been made available to any tribunal for evidence, and I do not know of any tribunal that has actually requested it yet.

It is a clear breach of natural justice to deny a claimaint, and his/her representative the right to examine and scrutines the methods used to gather and evaluate evidence.

As a large (the majority) part of the decision is down to a software algorithm, denying the scrutiny of said software is clearly against natural justice.

I also wonder why they stopped putting the benchbook in the public domain, so any 'updates' to it are not available to the public any more?
Isnt the very right to understand the rules a tribunal operates under a part of natural justice itself, after all, how can someone fairly point out an error in law was made if needed, if they have no access to the relavent documentation?

Bootski

cit_k wrote: »

There is a possibility Jesus may return and grant a mass miracle to 1 million on incap, but I seriously doubt it.

In the meantime, there remains the case that the DWP will (as they themselves admit) write people off, who cannot work, and will be unable to get any benefits.

People should have the right to work, if they are able, but they should not be incorrectly assessed or labelled and slung into work when its going to make things worse for their condition.

Most of the threads in question are not about people saying I am fit for work, please help me with my fight for work - they are about how they have *already* been mistreated by the benefits system, and unfairly assessed in their opinion.

I agree, Here we go again!!

I did say, having read these threads, there are some nasty people on here that proffess to help those less fortunate than themselves but are actually not fighting for the rights of the disables nor incapacitated.

Some are older but not the wiser, have the experience of the system but choose, blatantly, not to assist those in need.

People on here are asking for help and get kicked when they are already flat on their faces.

I shall continue to observe these hypocrits and their "friendy, 24/7" advice with interest and much dissappointment.

Give people a break, the advice they seek or get off your high horses.:D

Oldernotwiser

I'm going away to stick pins in my eyes - it seems a more attractive option than arguing with you two!

Bootski

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I'm going away to stick pins in my eyes - it seems a more attractive option than arguing with you two!

Yes - that would seem to be best for everyone!:rotfl:

alwayshavingago

Garry_Anderson wrote: »

[/I]



Duh!

1. Why nothing in benchbook about absence of presenting officer - when everything else is covered e.g. late claimant.

2. What about claimants right to question the evidence e.g. how a decision was made and what was done to verify - how can lack of due care and negligence be demonstrated if nobody answers these questions.

3. My 'judge' acted as 'prosecution' against me and made excuses for the DWP not showing up 'very busy people' etc.

Please do not DUH! at me.

Where it is necessary to gain further information or evidence to assist the Tribunal the Chair will make an order for this to be produced.

The Tribunal is there to make a decision on your entitlement to benefit they have the case as presented by the DWP in paper form.

In fact both sides can request a paper hearing - not advisable though because you do not have a chance to put your case in person putting you at a disadvantage.

In my experience The chair will normally do their best to explain the procedure to the claimant, they want to hear from the claimant and the questions are designed to help them assess the claimants entitlement to to the benefit and the decision in question.

They will and I have seen this happen get annoyed where someone insists on pursuing irrelevant points that do not relate to the decision being appealed.

What I have not seen you state is what was the outcome of your Tribunal?

cit_k

alwayshavingago wrote: »

Where it is necessary to gain further information or evidence to assist the Tribunal the Chair will make an order for this to be produced.

Unless the request is for LIMA, in which case they wont bother for some reason?

Oldernotwiser

Bootski wrote: »

I did say, having read these threads, there are some nasty people on here that proffess to help those less fortunate than themselves but are actually not fighting for the rights of the disables nor incapacitated.

Many of us have fought for disabled rights for years, encouraging employers to make workplace adaptations for people with disabilities and, in some cases, guaranteeing interviews for people in this situation.

It is truly shocking that there are now so many people like you who see "disabled rights" as being about nothing other than benefit entitlements.

You do all disabled people a disservice by taking this attitude.

Bootski

For the genuine people claiming benefits the DWP et al are supposed to be on the perifiral of the lives of those claiming - Not the centre of it.

Bit like the banks have overridden the influence in peoples lives.

They should be on the sidelines, helping them not dictating.

cit_k

It is truly shocking that there are now so many people like you who see "disabled rights" as being about nothing other than benefit entitlements.

It was not us that brought the term disabled rights into it, we are concentrating on the benefits issues. You are trying to deflect away from the topic again.