ESA Rejected

System

celinepatricia wrote: »

NASA wrote: »

Most people provide no evidence other than the ESA50 which is fairly worthless in reality.

Are you supposed to send other evidence. Im sure when we applied it said not to send anything other than the ESA50?

I was about to say the same, on the form it says NOT to send in any other info and if you do it will be ignored

NASA_2

celinepatricia wrote: »

Are you supposed to send other evidence. Im sure when we applied it said not to send anything other than the ESA50?

You dont have to supply any other evidence but I am not aware of any document that says not to send in additional information.

I had a quick look at the ESA1 and ESA50 and they certainly dont say not to include additional information. I have seen medical files with doctors letters, consultants letters etc. in them. They were supplied by the claimant.

celinepatricia

It does say not to send any other information other than the ESA50 form, why would anybody not send information that is going to help them?

NASA_2

Where does it say not to send anything? I read the ESA50 again and see it nowhere.

Most people dont supply additional information, I've no idea why they dont, I assume its due to ignorance or lazyness. They obviously should do.

celinepatricia

It was on an accompanying letter with the form. The actual form itself does not have it printed on it as far as I can remember.

I had plenty of medical evidence for them to read to back up our case. It is all sorted out now, went from zero points to into the support group.

Could you please answer me one question.. how can somebody who is on higher rate mobility with obvious mobility problems score zero at the ATOS medical. It is really puzzling me how the ATOS person came to that conclusion?

NASA_2

goffo wrote: »

I am sorry but again we will have to agree to disagree on this.
In all of the Regulations I have read, I cannot find one indication that points to it being the claimants responsibility to submit doctors reports etc. It is only mentioned when there is a failure and that a reconsideration can take place so please send in further evidence.

The only requirement of a claimant is to
1. submit MED3's
2. complete a ESA50
3. attend an assessment if required.

Now if I am wrong, I would love you to point out to me any other requirements. If there are more I will apologise profoundly.

Like I said, the regulations and the interpretations of the regulations change regularly in a new benefit, that is why they are reviewing cases again. The conservatives have instigated the further review from what I can see.

If ATOS state not to send in additional information with the ESA50 that is one thing. It doesnt preclude it being sent in at any other time to be associated with the ESA55 (Medical File).

I never said it was a requirement to send in additional information. Its an option. People can do it if they want to. They dont have to. I would think, though, that if I have a consultants report stating that I am virtually unable to walk (For example) that it would be a good idea to send that to the decision maker. The actual assessment with a HCP is only part of the WCA.

NASA_2

goffo wrote: »

I think you may be looking under the wrong pile on your desk.

Yes you are right, the ESA50 & ESA1 do not say ANYTHING about supplementary evidence. Neither send it in or not to.

But if you were to move over to the other pile on your desk, being the letter received from ATOS which enclosed the ESA50, you will find in bold black letters telling you that you MUST NOT send in anything other than the ESA50!

It isn't the DWP saying that they do or don't want the evidence, it's ATOS quite clearly saying that YOU MUST NOT SEND IT IN.

So we all are really blaming the DWP unfairly to be honest. We should be taking ATOS to task in telling us that they don't want any evidence.

Well, that would make sense, ATOS dont need the additional evidence. The DWP do as they make the decision.

And just to point out, there is no pile on my desk that is anything to do with ATOS, considering the place where I work has no interaction with them right now.:cool:

Two4Tuesday

To be fair, the wording on the letter from ATOS accompanying the ESA50 does say that any additional evidence can be sent directly to the BDC, but in bold text, mentions not to send it to ATOS.

If an organisation like ATOS asking for information on a claimant's health conditions states on its letter not to send them any additional information (but that it can be sent to someone else), most people would naturally assume that the ESA50 will be given more evidential weight than it perhaps is.

EDIT: Knowing about these issues after going through appeal once to move from WRAG to Support Group, on my review in October, I stapled copies of my medical evidence to the ESA50. Even if ATOS ignored them, I knew they would be seen by the decision maker and it saved me extra postage. It seems to have done the trick - 3 months later I haven't been called for a new medical.

celinepatricia

celinepatricia wrote: »

Could you please answer me one question.. how can somebody who is on higher rate mobility with obvious mobility problems score zero at the ATOS medical. It is really puzzling me how the ATOS person came to that conclusion?

any thoughts?

Indie_Kid

celinepatricia wrote: »

any thoughts?

We're not mind readers.