time it takes from medical to Decision

celinepatricia

But this is what I dont understand.. you are told NOT to send anything else other than ESA50 so how can they look at any other reports other than the ATOS assessors.

NASA_2

celinepatricia wrote: »

But this is what I dont understand.. you are told NOT to send anything else other than ESA50 so how can they look at any other reports other than the ATOS assessors.

Maybe told not to send anything with the ESA50 - as it is going to a specified section - but anyone can send additional evidence to the DWP decision makers.

dave030445

NASA wrote: »

Maybe told not to send anything with the ESA50 - as it is going to a specified section - but anyone can send additional evidence to the DWP decision makers.

but you dont know who your DM is this has been talked about in many other treads

NASA_2

dave030445 wrote: »

but you dont know who your DM is this has been talked about in many other treads

You dont need to know who the DM is. If your national insurance number is on what you send in then it should be associate with the rest of your papers. The DM can then decide based on the information in front of them. It's all (ESA50, medical report etc.) inside the one file.

celinepatricia

So why not just send all the relevant information together, and , then you are sure that one person has got all the information needed to come to an informed decision instead of all the messing about and going to appeal and going to tribunal.. which in my opinon wastes a lot of time and money!!

frank_begbie

celine_patricia wrote: »

So why not just send all the relevant information together, and , then you are sure that one person has got all the information needed to come to an informed decision instead of all the messing about and going to appeal and going to tribunal.. which in my opinion wastes a lot of time and money!!

Call me cynical but its all designed to save money for the government, why do you think they have means tested benefits in the first place?

They know that a certain amount of people won't even apply for the benefit.

They know from past experience that a lot of people won't even go to the medical or will sign off the ESA.
Also some will fail the medical and not bother to appeal, and some will appeal but fail at the hearing.

One way or the other they can almost guarantee that through these measures they will get at least a million people off ESA or whatever benefit they are claiming.

cit_k

NASA wrote: »

I do apologise for being so tardy but I only get on the internet on a Wednesday and Sunday as I havent taken broadband in my home.

The DM's can look at evidence provided from a GP/Consultant etc. They look at the ESA50. They can look at anything provided to them by the claimant and attach the appropriate weight to it depending on where the information is coming from.

ATOS report is heavily weighted, GP/Consultant report is less heavily weighted and, IMO, claimant providing their own evidence ie. personal viewpoint is not worth the paper it is written on.

Most people dont provide any evidence that supports their claim to be sick other than the medical evidence they send in (Or claim to have sent in) every few weeks/months.

NASA wrote: »

I do apologise for being so tardy but I only get on the internet on a Wednesday and Sunday as I havent taken broadband in my home.

The DM's can look at evidence provided from a GP/Consultant etc. They look at the ESA50. They can look at anything provided to them by the claimant and attach the appropriate weight to it depending on where the information is coming from.

ATOS report is heavily weighted, GP/Consultant report is less heavily weighted and, IMO, claimant providing their own evidence ie. personal viewpoint is not worth the paper it is written on.

Most people dont provide any evidence that supports their claim to be sick other than the medical evidence they send in (Or claim to have sent in) every few weeks/months.

If you are saying claimaint provided evidence is not worth the paper it is written on, then what is the point of saying that tribunals are won because the claimaint provides evidence that the DM did not have? As the DM would have ignored that evidence any way even if they had sent it to the dm....

celinepatricia

So filling in the ESA50 is basically a waste of paper and sending any other evidence is a waste of time because they DM will alsways go with the ATOS report.

dave030445

celinepatricia wrote: »

So filling in the ESA50 is basically a waste of paper and sending any other evidence is a waste of time because they DM will alsways go with the ATOS report.

yes i think you have got it.

bertiebat

dave030445 wrote: »

Oh come on dont make me laugh how many people with a long term condition get put in the wrg

With the existing criteria, quite a few I imagine.

There are no provisions in the assessment process to simply put people into the support group even though they will never get better (incurable illnesses/disabilities). A lot of these people passing the assessment will be put into the WRAG.