Confirmation of How *Not* to Fill in the DLA Form

concerned43

cit_k wrote: »

If any welfare rights worker or charity (say CAB) or anything advises you on how to fill in a form, I would strongly suggest you ask for that advice in writing, so you should a problem ever occur in the future, can prove what you were advised by a professional.

I think you will find those in the CAB don't advise or suggest anything, nor would we ever put words down that the client did not say! There are VERY strict rules about this. We simply go through the form with the client and they tell us how there condition effects them. The forms are not easy and it helps the client if we 'walk' through the form with them.

Oldernotwiser

peediedj wrote: »

when we applied we were told to put down the worst day

Well, you'll know better next time.:D

Invalidation

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Well, you'll know better next time.:D

Yes, they'll know that if they are genuine claimants and dont play golf 3 times a week or go line dancing then they put down the worst day.
The DLA asessors work on definites, not possibilites.

sunnyone

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Well, you'll know better next time.:D

Invalidation wrote: »

Yes, they'll know that if they are genuine claimants and dont play golf 3 times a week or go line dancing then they put down the worst day.
The DLA asessors work on definites, not possibilites.

If you claim on your worst day only you can never, ever leave the house without worrying who is watching and recording you.

If you claim to be bed bound, why are you going to the shops?

If you claim you cant walk whay are you walking from your car to your front door?

If you cant socailise whay are you at park/bingo/pub?

Why would anyone want to live like that?

cit_k

concerned43 wrote: »

I think you will find those in the CAB don't advise or suggest anything, nor would we ever put words down that the client did not say! There are VERY strict rules about this. We simply go through the form with the client and they tell us how there condition effects them. The forms are not easy and it helps the client if we 'walk' through the form with them.

Yes, but if you make sure you have it in writing you were helped with the form, in whatever way, then ATOS cant turn round and use the classic "had no difficulty filling in form" line on the medical report.

I actually did ring welfare rights for advice, on the form, but when I was asked at medical if I got any help, had to ask anyone about the form, I forgot I had done so.

Then the assessor explained that the software takes it as you have had no difficulty if you filled in the form without any assistance, as I was querying why on earth it said that when I made it clear I had great difficulty filling in the form.

I only remembered I had asked a couple of weeks later, by which time its too late.

But if it was written on the form, even if I forgot about it at the medical, if it went to tribunal, they would know I was not making it up, and had just forgot on the day.

Flyboy152

pwales wrote: »

tbh .i think this ruling will get the 20% saving dla are looking for on its own, the amount of people who have said they put down there worst days as normal days are alot

The trouble with that is, that it also gives them an excuse to say that someone who can walk fifty yards on some days, does not need DLA.

Flyboy152

philip wrote: »

I was told, many years ago by DWP to use 'worst day' scenario.

We have been told that for the last eight years.

Flyboy152

PudseyDB wrote: »

I hate the DLA forms with a vengence!! The questions seem to be geared mainly towards physical disabilities, rather than sensory.

I'm deaf every single day - how much "help" I need simply depends on what I'm doing that day.

I fully empathise, try doing one for a child with ASD, that's a minefield.

Hastobe_Katt

Isn't also a case of understanding the purpose of the benefit? For ESA, it's not to cover the costs of providing extra care / mobility needs it's to assess you capability for work. It is therefore reasonably obvious that the number of days that you are really struggling compared with the number of days you cope are important. As are definitions of what 'really struggling' and 'coping' means for you. As an employer, would I take on someone who has an occasional bad day or could perhaps work a few hours rather than a full day but could do it with a reasonable degree of consistency. For certain jobs, loss of sight, mobility etc wouldn't be a problem and could be accommodated.

Personally I can work (with help from my 'happy pills' and crutches) but I doubt anyone would want to employ me on a permanent basis. Over the last few years I had a lot of surgeries and other health problems that have necessitated long periods away from work. I work around this by doing short term temping work to try to work during my 'good' periods. It still leaves me high and dry when I am between contracts so I have to be careful with the money I do earn.

The government (as usual) are wanting to have their cake and eat it. At one time SSP was paid by the government so there was a, potentially, much lower cost to the employer if their employee needed to take time off due to illness. The government have pushed this cost back onto the employer but are now also expecting employers to start taking on individuals who are likely to need time off work. I would be interested to know - particularly in the current economic climate when fit and healthy people can't get work - how many of those who are told that they are capable of doing some work are actually finding employment. Or are they just trading one benefit for another, less appropriate, one.