DWP, Medicals

cit_k

Gemstar30 wrote: »

Hello,

They don't have to. When you fill in the ESA50 you should have given enough information, examples etc that that coupled with the assessors report is more than enough to base the decision on.

If the ESA50 was not complete in every aspect, then you can't expect them to be able to give a proper decision. The onus and responsibility on claiming ESA and putting forward your case is down to you, not your doctor or consultant.

What your GP/consultant does has nothing to do with being assessed for ESA. They decide how to treat you, ATOS just look at the possibility that you could do some work whether you are ill, disabled or not.

Gemma
x

1 - if you stay 'within' the rules, it is usually impossible for the esa50 to be complete, as the space for replies is VERY limited and you are specificaly told NOT to send in anything else with the form.

2 - ATOS are meant to take into account other medical evidence where appropriate - they failed to do so in 87 percent of IB cases.

3 - The assessors have to comply with either GMC or NMWC rules regarding full and complete and accurate medical reports, etc.

azules

You should not really hijack someone else Post by personel point gaining you know guys.
I have recieved the info I required from posters to this forum and I am extremley gratefull to them for it.
But it does not help having to trawl all the way through your personel attacks on each other.
leave it be now

thanks

FTW

azules wrote: »

You should not really hijack someone else Post by personel point gaining you know guys.
I have recieved the info I required from posters to this forum and I am extremley gratefull to them for it.
But it does not help having to trawl all the way through your personel attacks on each other.
leave it be now

thanks

Point taken. I've already given my advice, and the thread was deviating off-topic somewhat - but then ATOS does get peoples' bile rising.

azules

Agreed my friend
But someone else may have the same problem and need to do a search
I think having to go through the disagreemnets rather that the help
they may lose out on not bothering to read through the posts that help

melbury

It sounds like it was a lot easier to get Incapacity Benefit than it is to get ESA. I mean from what I have read some people have been on it for decades and just been left alone, no wonder the system needs an overhaul. People should be monitored on a regular basis. Was IB given on the recommendation of your own GP rather than having an independent review?

cit_k

melbury wrote: »

It sounds like it was a lot easier to get Incapacity Benefit than it is to get ESA. I mean from what I have read some people have been on it for decades and just been left alone, no wonder the system needs an overhaul. People should be monitored on a regular basis. Was IB given on the recommendation of your own GP rather than having an independent review?

Thats a myth.

No body (apart from exemptions, which can happen under ESA too, although ESA has less of them) on Incapacity benefit was left alone.

They are ALL assessed (and have to be by law) on a recurring basis, most have to go in for medicals, some can be passed by documentation alone (no point in a medical for people in coma's etc).

IB was exactly the same as ESA really, apart from it was actually in some ways (going by the design, not by how things actually operate) harsher than ESA.

ESA allows people to claim even if they are fit to work (but require help) - Incapacity benefit was only for people who were unfit to hold down any job - there was none of this ESA stuff where you can be sort of fit to work with a bit help.

Incapacity was also exactly like ESA in that the claimaints were assessed just like they are now by ATOS (using similar if not the same but slighty altered software).

It was the same in that people were assessed over and over.

It was the same that many people had to appeal.

It was the same that many people overturned the decision at appeal (in fact more did on IB that ESA, so IB was actually turning more people away at medical).

There is very, very little difference between IB and ESA.

ESA is basically Incapacity benefit with the test tweaked so 1 million people on IB will fail the new test.

That really is the only major difference, apart from ESA allows people who are not completely unfit for work to claim - which IB did not.