ESA Medical - here we go again!

NASA_2

cit_k wrote: »

And it would not be against the law to pay out performance related bonuses or bonuses for hitting targets for failing people etc etc.

Thefore, ATOS could be doing so, and as the DWP pay ATOS, indirectly the DWP would then be paying people to be failed to targets or paying people bonuses to fail people.

Yes, they could, its merely speculation on your part though because it suits your agenda to say it happens.

Hastobe_Katt

NASA wrote: »

Yes, they could, its merely speculation on your part though because it suits your agenda to say it happens.

I think there have been enough reports of doctors resigning from ATOS because of this to make it pretty damn obvious this is happening. Even if the target is X medicals in Y minutes (I heard reports from three former ATOS doctors stating that they were to spend no more than 15mins) then one has to question the quality of the medical assessment. My doctor's appointments last at least 20 minutes - and that's with a doctor who is very familiar with my condition.

NASA_2

I think your confusing the issue.

Cit_K is basically stating that the DWP pay ATOS a bonus to fail as many people as they possibly can. I think he is talking through his backside.

I have absolutely no contention with stating that ATOS will see as many people as humanely possible as quickly as possible. They are a private sector organisation looking to make a profit. Another reason why they are unlikely to want to pay as many bonuses as they would have to if Cit_k was right and not someone who is a career benefit claimant.

deeplyblue

sunnyone wrote: »

All appeals go direct to the DWP, they then do a reconsideration before deciding if the appeal is allowed, if it is then copies of all the paperwork are sent to the claimant and the tribunal service.

This does not sound like the current standard system, though my knowledge of it is a little outdated. I did not think that the DWP were yet able to decide whether or not you were allowed to appeal. Has this changed since the introduction of ESA?

Way back when I was last involved with this, the official sequence of events went like this (maybe it could have gone further, but this is as far as I know):

1. Apply by submitting a claim form
2. DWP decides if you need medical
3. Have medical (probably)
4. Results of medical, your form and any additional documentation go to DWP
5. Decision maker (DM) decides you don't get it and tells you so
6. You can involve legal assistance (e.g. Citizens' Advice Bureau)
7. You ask for a reconsideration by DWP
8. 2nd DM looks at your papers and confirms original decision to reject claim
9. You appeal and papers get sent to Tribunal Service (TS).
10. You can send in additional material to TS
11. TS sends out copies of all documents to DWP, you, your legal assistant team.
12. You chose whether to have an oral or a paper hearing (i.e. whether you want to have a panel question you or not - you stand a much better chance if you let the panel talk to you.
13. Tribunal turns you down
14. You apply for leave to appeal to the Social Security Commissioner
15. They say you can't appeal to SS Commissioner
16. You apply to the SS Commissioner for leave to appeal to the SS Commissioner
17. They (SS Commissioner) say you can appeal to SS Commissioner
18. You appeal to the SS Commissioner
19. They hand down a ruling saying that the Tribunal should think again
20. The Tribunal thinks again
21. You get your allowance.

These days I believe that there is no longer a SS Commissioner, but there is a further level of Tribunal (the "Upper Tribunal"?) to go through, and I suspect that you don't need for leave to appeal to them, but could easily be wrong about a system I haven't had to research.

I believe however that stages 7 and 8 (involving a second Decision Maker) are theoretically still in place. However, I have read elsewhere that [a] the 2nd DM only overturns the 1st in a very few instances and they take a very long time.

As a consequence, some of the people who might help (CAB, WRO) advise that you skip that stage and go straight to appeal to the Tribunal stage (no 9 above).

This represents what I believe to be the current "official" story.

They are also running a trial of what they call "reconsideration" system which received some exposure on the Benefits & Work site, which acts like a traditional reconsideration and is presented by the DWP as a way of "screening" appeals. Note that I do not think that in the current system the DWP have any right to decide who can and cannot appeal their decision. If they could, many fewer cases would go to appeal and the appeals system as a whole would be under much less pressure. There would also be many fewer of the DWP's decisions reversed.

This is not, however, part of the mainstream - yet.

I find this whole procedure offensive, and have already written to my MP about it. I intend to write more, and hope to put that material on this site eventually.

FTW

NASA wrote: »

I think your confusing the issue.

Cit_K is basically stating that the DWP pay ATOS a bonus to fail as many people as they possibly can. I think he is talking through his backside.

Not necessarily. Both the DWP and Atos refuse to make public - or even make it known to ministers - the entire content of the contract they have.

NASA wrote: »

I have absolutely no contention with stating that ATOS will see as many people as humanely possible as quickly as possible.

To the detriment of anyone who has to see them.

NASA wrote: »

They are a private sector organisation looking to make a profit.

All the more reason for why they shouldn't be trusted with the responsibility they've been given.

Even the government admits that Atos have presided over massive flaws, which contradicts their decision to deem them suitable to continue the contract.

I don't think that it's understating matters to say that Atos are now one of the most reviled private companies in the UK - and rightly so.

melbury

Just wondered, when you attend your second ATOS medical assessment, do they use the original questionnaire as a template and just tweak it where necessary, or do they start the whole thing again and go through the entire question process from scratch?

Oh well, guess I will find out soon enough, leaving in 15 mins for the ATOS medical - everything crossed!

sunnyone

I have supported someone through the appeal process which was sucessful a couple of weeks ago and the process was as I have posted, I dont know if every single appeal follows this same process just my experiance of this one appeal.

The DWP do have to accept the appeal.

Melbury the first medical assessment was documented in the paperwork the tribunal service sent out, not a copy of the ESA50 just a couple of paragraphs about it.

System

God the DWP are useless sometimes. I moved house so they've sent me another ES2 form to fill in but on the top of it its got "treat as es2 moved in with partner" :eek: I told them quite clearly the other week that i'm single and living in a flatshare but they seem to have jumped the goun and made their own assumptions. :wall:

As a side note does anyone know if this means i'll be put back on the assessment rate or do i stay on the rate i'm on now until I've had another medical?

melbury

sunnyone wrote: »

I have supported someone through the appeal process which was sucessful a couple of weeks ago and the process was as I have posted, I dont know if every single appeal follows this same process just my experiance of this one appeal.

The DWP do have to accept the appeal.

Melbury the first medical assessment was documented in the paperwork the tribunal service sent out, not a copy of the ESA50 just a couple of paragraphs about it.

Thanks for the information, we had to go through the whole process again with all the same questions as the first time. Strange thing is that I am sure I saw the original of the form ESA50 in the file he had, but I thought this went to the DWP for them to read through:eek: Don't the DWP even get to see the original form and, if not, why not?

I couldn't believe it though, the lad who went in before us (with a hoodie pulled right up) was only in there for about 10 minutes, not the 40 minutes that we were and this was our second visit.

TheBottomLine_2

Why did you feel the need to point out he was wearing a hoodie?