ESA stopped - need urgent advice please as no money

cit_k

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I absolutely agree but would add that some patients have their GP (and even their consultant) wrapped around their little finger.

And a 100 million + a year contract from the DWP with targets, has ATOS wrapped around the DWP's little finger.

Payment *per assessment* to the assessors has greedy assessors wrapped around the little finger of rushing through assessments as fast as possible to earn as much as possible.

Gemstar30

cit_k wrote: »

Of course, that only makes sense if the evidence provided by third parties is specific to if a person could return to a specific job.
[edit to add] and has no relavance at ALL to the benefit legislation, which is unlikely [/edit]
However, it often is not, and can contain facts that are relavent to the decision.

However -

the DWP are told to give ATOS reports more evidential weight than any other form of evidence, no matter what it contains, no matter who its from etc.

ATOS reports rule the roost, even if they are of lesser medical worth than the other evidence, even if the other evidence is directly relavent to not being able to hold down ANY job.

The situation is different for DLA however in that the situation is reversed and decision makers are told to give third party evidence more evidential weight than ATOS reports.

Hello

I agree with you and the way that the DWP look at the ATOS evidence. ATOS are specifically looking at one thing - your ability to work - what you can do, whereas most GP's or Consultant's cannot give that sort of report. The only way that I can see that ATOS could be challenged is to have an independent OH report carried out looking at your abilities not what is wrong with you.

Gemma
x

Gemstar30

cit_k wrote: »

And a 100 million + a year contract from the DWP with targets, has ATOS wrapped around the DWP's little finger.

Payment *per assessment* to the assessors has greedy assessors wrapped around the little finger of rushing through assessments as fast as possible to earn as much as possible.

Hello,

It is not the speed of the assessment but the speed that the assessor can input the data into the software that matters.
He/she is not there to diagnose or offer any form of help. He/she is there to input data on what he finds, not what you tell him/her.
Call it a 6th sense then, he/she will know within minutes what he thinks - he/she will have gained an impression already.
He/she uses his eyes more than listens to what you tell him/her.

That has to be right!

Otherwise everybody will pass the medical.

Your GP will listen to what you say and trust and believe in you and that you are genuine.
Yes it may seem that the GP is wrapped around your little finger - he believes what you tell him/her as being the truth.

You can't expect that from ATOS?

If you can, then I have every illness and disability that is listed in 'Blacks' and expect to live 4 weeks!!!

Gemma
x

cit_k

Gemstar30 wrote: »

Hello,

It is not the speed of the assessment but the speed that the assessor can input the data into the software that matters

A fast assessment means the assessor cannot have done an accurate assessment in a lot of cases, as the *only* way to do so, for many, is to over-ride the software.

Overiding the software is *very* time consuming, as not only do they have to enter in the details they are over-riding they also have to enter FULL justification of why they are straying from existing protocols/software behaviour etc.

Gemstar30 wrote: »

He/she is not there to diagnose or offer any form of help. He/she is there to input data on what he finds, not what you tell him/her.

Yes he or she is not there to diagnose or offer any form of help (although the do not always follow that rule, I have been offered 'medical advice' by an assessor before, in breach of rules)

However, they ARE their to input data on not only what they observe, but also what you tell them.

To not do so, would be in breach of the contract, and good practice rules for their professional body.

Gemstar30 wrote: »

Call it a 6th sense then, he/she will know within minutes what he thinks - he/she will have gained an impression already.
He/she uses his eyes more than listens to what you tell him/her.

Im afraid paranormal activity is not part of legislation.

Yes they do make observations, and rightly so, as long as the observations are fair.

However, if you read the official guidance for assessors you will see that they are trained to make assumptions from the observations (and the software makes even worse assumptions that are often ludicrous) that are out of order. They are also trained to be careful in the wording of these assumptions so there is no come back legally (ie word the lie so it is not provable as a lie).

But, a major part of the assessment is what the claimaint states, and its ludicrous to claim otherwise, and ludicrous to say it should be ignored - in fact, if a doctor said that to the GMC they would almost certainly face disciplinary action.

Gemstar30 wrote: »

That has to be right!
Otherwise everybody will pass the medical.

Nope, its wrong as I have demonstrated.

Gemstar30 wrote: »

Your GP will listen to what you say and trust and believe in you and that you are genuine.
Yes it may seem that the GP is wrapped around your little finger - he believes what you tell him/her as being the truth.

You can't expect that from ATOS?

If you can, then I have every illness and disability that is listed in 'Blacks' and expect to live 4 weeks!!!

Gemma
x

Untrue, as they will in that case write to your GP for confirmation of your conditions, and do you for benefit fraud when he or she writes back saying you do not suffer from them.

cit_k

Gemstar30 wrote: »

Hello

I agree with you and the way that the DWP look at the ATOS evidence. ATOS are specifically looking at one thing - your ability to work - what you can do, whereas most GP's or Consultant's cannot give that sort of report. The only way that I can see that ATOS could be challenged is to have an independent OH report carried out looking at your abilities not what is wrong with you.

Gemma
x

You are assuming the report is written with regards to a persons job capability, and not how the illness/disability affects them, and what symptoms they have, which would be the normal type of report.

Gemstar30

cit_k wrote: »

You are assuming the report is written with regards to a persons job capability, and not how the illness/disability affects them, and what symptoms they have, which would be the normal type of report.

Hello,

Phew!!!!!

I'm not up to answering your points at the moment, but will do so either later or tomorrow, depending if my medication allows.

Yes you make some good points, but I have tried to cover most by saying that people could and may, as I recognise that not everybody is that capable - hence the need for the appeal system.
I do feel that the ideas behind ESA and the medical itself are fair and well needed after the years of the IB debacle. Exempting someone from an IB because of the level of DLA is ridiculous to be honest.
What on earth has DLA got in common with trying to find out somebody's ability to work. You can and many do, work and claim DLA!!!

The two benefits are miles apart.

And, if you are honest about it, to pass the old IB medical was easy - too easy in my opinion. There are so many claimants of IB around that that is the reason why it had to change. Everybody knows somebody who claims it but shouldn't!!

It moves away from what you cannot do as regards work capability to a more positive approach - what you can do given your illnesses and disabilities.

Yes there are many that do have serious medical conditions that work from home for example.

I may have mobility problems myself, but have good eyesight. I may have serious gastro problems as well, but that doesn't stop my brain working. The medication I take does limit when I am fit to do something, so I choose my times even if it is 4am!!

So yes I can do something, it's all a question of feeling and being positive about yourself. Not giving in. Work within your own capabilities.

As a final point, if I had claimed IB years ago I would have had no trouble getting the benefit. So did I want to sit on my backside and feel sorry for myself - no, I started a little business which has grown over the years into a full time job.

Embrace the opportunity that the government is offering and think positively about what you could do now. Even if it is only for a couple of hours a week at home. I'll bet you could come up with something that you could do.

Gemma
x

cit_k

Gemstar30 wrote: »

I do feel that the ideas behind ESA and the medical itself are fair and well needed after the years of the IB debacle.

That would be based on what research, what experience? It was not long ago you did not know the basics of ESA....

Exempting someone from an IB because of the level of DLA is ridiculous to be honest.
What on earth has DLA got in common with trying to find out somebody's ability to work. You can and many do, work and claim DLA!!!

How many work on the highest level of the care component of DLA?
Those are people with some pretty serious care needs.

The two benefits are miles apart.

Only in harshness, nothing else really.

And, if you are honest about it, to pass the old IB medical was easy - too easy in my opinion.

I thought you had never taken the IB medical, you even say so in the post, so how do you know?
What research into IB have you done, I can tell it is next to none from the things you have written about it (ie people getting IB for coughs and colds etc).

There are so many claimants of IB around that that is the reason why it had to changue. Everybody knows somebody who claims it but shouldn't!!

Nope, I dont, and most of the people you refer to, are likely the people that phone up the hotline to report the fraud yet only 0.3 percent of those calls led to prosecution.

Are you a doctor? Do you get to see their claim for and medical records? Are you present at the assessment? If not, you dont know if they are eligible or not.

It moves away from what you cannot do as regards work capability to a more positive approach - what you can do given your illnesses and disabilities.

No it most certainly does not - that is pure propaganda, the assessments have not changed in that regard, they simply have a higher bar to entry.

It is a complete lie that they have a positive approach, in fact, even the assessment that is meant to determine what help is needed has been stopped for two years!

Yes there are many that do have serious medical conditions that work from home for example.

And many who cannot.

I may have mobility problems myself, but have good eyesight. I may have serious gastro problems as well, but that doesn't stop my brain working. The medication I take does limit when I am fit to do something, so I choose my times even if it is 4am!!

So yes I can do something, it's all a question of feeling and being positive about yourself. Not giving in. Work within your own capabilities.

As a final point, if I had claimed IB years ago I would have had no trouble getting the benefit. So did I want to sit on my backside and feel sorry for myself - no, I started a little business which has grown over the years into a full time job.

You *think* you would have had no trouble, but you have no way of knowing that for sure.

Embrace the opportunity that the government is offering and think positively about what you could do now. Even if it is only for a couple of hours a week at home. I'll bet you could come up with something that you could do.

Gemma
x

The opportunity to be lied about by assessors? The opportunity to have to fight for justice yet again?

Gemstar30

cit_k wrote: »

That would be based on what research, what experience? It was not long ago you did not know the basics of ESA....



How many work on the highest level of the care component of DLA?
Those are people with some pretty serious care needs.




Only in harshness, nothing else really.



I thought you had never taken the IB medical, you even say so in the post, so how do you know?
What research into IB have you done, I can tell it is next to none from the things you have written about it (ie people getting IB for coughs and colds etc).



Nope, I dont, and most of the people you refer to, are likely the people that phone up the hotline to report the fraud yet only 0.3 percent of those calls led to prosecution.

Are you a doctor? Do you get to see their claim for and medical records? Are you present at the assessment? If not, you dont know if they are eligible or not.




No it most certainly does not - that is pure propaganda, the assessments have not changed in that regard, they simply have a higher bar to entry.

It is a complete lie that they have a positive approach, in fact, even the assessment that is meant to determine what help is needed has been stopped for two years!



And many who cannot.



You *think* you would have had no trouble, but you have no way of knowing that for sure.



The opportunity to be lied about by assessors? The opportunity to have to fight for justice yet again?

Hello

I am certainly not going to get involved in the political side of welfare benefits.
I have expressed my opinion which I feel is fair, just and reasonable.
It seems that you have a strong objection to the way ESA is promoted. I would suggest you complain to your MP and not me.
I have never said everybody only some and may.

From knowing very little, I have spent hours over the past few weeks reading up on as much info as I can find on the subject. The overall impression I get is that the change from IB to ESA was needed a long time ago.

And like everything in life, you have to have a positive attitude as you will get nowhere at all.
I'm sorry to have to say this but you seem to have so much anger and objection, why don't you use that fighting spirit in another, more helpful way to help yourself.


There are many things in life that don't seem fair or right, you can't really expect people to have much sympathy for someone who appears to be so bitter.

Laugh and they will laugh with you, cry and you cry alone!

Gemma
x

cit_k

Gemstar30 wrote: »

Hello

I am certainly not going to get involved in the political side of welfare benefits.
I have expressed my opinion which I feel is fair, just and reasonable.
It seems that you have a strong objection to the way ESA is promoted. I would suggest you complain to your MP and not me.
I have never said everybody only some and may.

From knowing very little, I have spent hours over the past few weeks reading up on as much info as I can find on the subject. The overall impression I get is that the change from IB to ESA was needed a long time ago.

And like everything in life, you have to have a positive attitude as you will get nowhere at all.
I'm sorry to have to say this but you seem to have so much anger and objection, why don't you use that fighting spirit in another, more helpful way to help yourself.


There are many things in life that don't seem fair or right, you can't really expect people to have much sympathy for someone who appears to be so bitter.

Laugh and they will laugh with you, cry and you cry alone!

Gemma
x

So, if you have read up, you can explain why you feel the need was justifiable (and you claim you do not want to get in the 'political side' then immediately do so?).

You should be able to address all the points I have raised, counter them with facts.

Instead, you come out with unrelated to the topic stuff, that does not answer any of the points at all.

If you are going to state ESA is as you claim, and was needed etc, and IB was to easy etc etc etc then you should be able to back it up.


You have not so far done so.

I repeat, your words are on a par with the stuff a tory spin doctor would come out with, and your evidence is the same - non existant.

Please, either put up the evidence, counter the points raised, or stop making claims you cannot substantiate with even the barest of evidence.

Gemstar30

cit_k wrote: »

So, if you have read up, you can explain why you feel the need was justifiable (and you claim you do not want to get in the 'political side' then immediately do so?).

You should be able to address all the points I have raised, counter them with facts.

Instead, you come out with unrelated to the topic stuff, that does not answer any of the points at all.

If you are going to state ESA is as you claim, and was needed etc, and IB was to easy etc etc etc then you should be able to back it up.


You have not so far done so.

I repeat, your words are on a par with the stuff a tory spin doctor would come out with, and your evidence is the same - non existant.

Please, either put up the evidence, counter the points raised, or stop making claims you cannot substantiate with even the barest of evidence.

Hello

I do not have the time or inclination to argue with you.
This is a forum for people to ask questions and others to give best advice.

Not some sort of soap box opera to pull others to pieces.
I have a very good idea where you want to drag this, and I see that I am not the only one that you 'attack' with questions that bear no relevance to the original thread.

Stick to the questions offered and please answer in a polite and respectful manner with either the answer or indeed a comment that is meaningful.

You certainly have majoir issues going on in your life that need sorting out and I don't think that this is the stage to do it on. Try Westminster - a lovely piece of grass opposite Parliament where you could pitch your tent and wear your woolly hat!

Gemma
x