We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
ESA Medical - here we go again!
Comments
-
That could mean anything - a call centre worker may be given a bonus for keeping call times short, does it mean that they are efficient or cutting people off?
The ATOS employee may be given a bonus for failing people, or maybe it is for how many people they see ... or indeed, maybe it is for how many reports they make that do not result in an appeal?
Unlikely, ATOS are not meant to know the outcome of any assessment, so they could not be told if one ended in an appeal or not.
They are meant to do so many assessments per day, they have a set time for how long a average assessment should last.
They get paid per assessment..[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0 -
Absolutely, but as we do not even know what these performance targets are measuring, how can anyone suggest that they are being manipulated!
They are in the contract surely?
Things like how many assessments they do, a complaint rate of under around 5 percent (or some other similar low figure) etc.[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0 -
Still proves absolutely nothing whatsoever.
Pretty tedious fare.
Neither does the dwp statements, or the contract that was released as the contract has all the payment areas missing.[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0 -
Absolutely, whether we agree or not with the ESA changes, the fact is that it is not ATOS that have made them.
They had considerable input into the changes though, and always have.[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0 -
There are a lot of angry posts here (and no doubt with good reason) but many are not related to the original question. As I pointed out in the previous post, there are a lot of Assessments so even a small percentage of problems will result in a lot of angry people.
With an appeal overturn rate of about 70 percent for ib and 40 percent for ESA, its more than a small percentage of people complaining. Not to mention those who overturn before tribunal stage.Also, with so many people to review the process of calling people for a medical must be a mechanistic, tick a box process.
No it must not be, they have a duty of care under their medical code of ethics from their monitoring body (be it gmc or nmwc) to do accurate and honest medical reports. So they are acting outside of their professional ethics to do a mechanistic tickbox process that is known to be massively innacurate.
There is not enough time to look in detail at every case to decide if a medical is required.
Again, there should be, for the same reasons, as they have to compile a pre board medical report - again to keep within professional guidance the medical professional should ensure whatever time is required to do an accurate report is actual is actuall taken. Failure to do so is a serious breach of ethics.If they undertake a medical then that's the time they will consider the person's condition in detail.
They should already have done so, and should do so in further detail at the medical, but they will not do so.
On the matter of Atos and their approach to their responsibilities, the independent review of ESA carried out by Professor Harrington can be found by following the link to dwp.gov.uk/policy/welfare-reform/employment-and-support/wca-independent-review/. There you can see the details of what he found and what changes he recommended. I have no reason to doubt Professor Harrington's integrity, independence or motives and he clearly had acces to papers and people that we do not. It makes an interesting read.
Perhaps a separate facility somewhere here to record the facts of people's experience and the things they have found out would be most useful. There is another review of ESA required next year and such a body of evidence can be submitted to the review process.
I doubt harringtons integrity, and ability to do the job.[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0 -
Why have posts by myself and dmg been removed?0
-
I don't want to get into a squable with cit_k about the post I made and perhaps I did not explain myself as clearly as I could have.
I dont know why cit_k doubts Professor Harrington, but as far as I know he is a leading academic in his field and has produced a balanced and accurate account of the situation. If you read the report you will see it contains reference to many of the problems people have identified here and suggests practical solutions to many of the shortcomings of the Work Capability Assessment AKA Atos medical. He is certainly not a champion for Atos or the DWP. A quick bit of Google will find both his report and the governments response to his recommendations.
The figure of 40% of decisions changed on appeal does not suggest that 40% of decisions are wrong. It means that 40% of those cases where the applicant feels the decision is wrong and choses to go to appeal have the initial decision overturned.
When it comes to calling for people to attend a medical this does not decide the outcome of the medical. I fully agree that the medical must be undertaken to the standard we have a right to expect from a medical professional. The decision to call for a person to attend a medical is hardly in the same league. If you have a car accident and get injured, the other party's insurer may require you have a medical before agreeing payment without any reference to a doctor before the medical is undertaken.
Hope I've made myself a bit clearer this time.
Before you ask, yes I've had the pleasure of an Atos medical, yes I disagreed with their conclusions, yes I've had to go through the pain of challenging their conclusions and yes the decision was changed. I'm no fan of the current process, I'm certainly no fan of Atos and I do understand how stressful, impersonal and demeaning the whole experience can be. The reason for my posting was simply to hopefully help others to avoid some of the pitfalls and some of the stress.0 -
There is a valid reason for that.Neither does the dwp statements, or the contract that was released as the contract has all the payment areas missing.
Contracts should be kept confidential for reasons that should be clear to anyone with any ounce of sense.
Yes, ATOS can pay their staff however they wish, so long as they obey the law.The DWP pay ATOS..
What ATOS does with the money, is by the DWP's own admission unkown.
So ATOS could be paying bonuses.
Is that unreasonable?0 -
I don't want to get into a squable with cit_k about the post I made and perhaps I did not explain myself as clearly as I could have.
I dont know why cit_k doubts Professor Harrington, but as far as I know he is a leading academic in his field and has produced a balanced and accurate account of the situation. If you read the report you will see it contains reference to many of the problems people have identified here and suggests practical solutions to many of the shortcomings of the Work Capability Assessment AKA Atos medical. He is certainly not a champion for Atos or the DWP. A quick bit of Google will find both his report and the governments response to his recommendations.
The figure of 40% of decisions changed on appeal does not suggest that 40% of decisions are wrong. It means that 40% of those cases where the applicant feels the decision is wrong and choses to go to appeal have the initial decision overturned.
When it comes to calling for people to attend a medical this does not decide the outcome of the medical. I fully agree that the medical must be undertaken to the standard we have a right to expect from a medical professional. The decision to call for a person to attend a medical is hardly in the same league. If you have a car accident and get injured, the other party's insurer may require you have a medical before agreeing payment without any reference to a doctor before the medical is undertaken.
Hope I've made myself a bit clearer this time.
Before you ask, yes I've had the pleasure of an Atos medical, yes I disagreed with their conclusions, yes I've had to go through the pain of challenging their conclusions and yes the decision was changed. I'm no fan of the current process, I'm certainly no fan of Atos and I do understand how stressful, impersonal and demeaning the whole experience can be. The reason for my posting was simply to hopefully help others to avoid some of the pitfalls and some of the stress.
I just doubt his ability, and integrity, as I tried to submit rather a lot of pertinant evidence, and it was all brushed under the carpet, if I recall, only one of the things I suggested will now be looked at in the year two review.
The report is also quite tame, considering how much he could have written.
All in all, although the report does raise many important points, it basically only raises what I feel they could not avoid raising due to the amount of already published info in those areas.
Far more could have been covered, and far more was suggestted for coverage that was ignored.
The decision to call for medical, is based on a professional medical persons report - and as such must be accurate and professional, no evidence must be ignored, unless it can be explained why it was discounted, they often fail to do this.
Ask for a copy of your pre-board report, and you will likely see what I mean.
I submitted over 10 pages of evidence, and it was all ignored, in fact, it was not even read (by atos's own admission, which they apologised for, but STILL went ahead with the medical).
The medical was then officially recorded, and they still lied - despite the official recording.
They even had the nerve to make me sign a document stating I could not use the official evidence for anything other than a tribunal to obtain benefits, and clarified quite clearly when asked that I could not use the tape to report any concerns or lies etc to the GMC or other legal bodies as is my legal right.[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0 -
Please continue to post if you think you know anything more thats relevant. I especially liked the very long post on page one and I did read the whole post. I've saved it into notepad on my computer for future reference. :T
I also saved the first post. This person is very helpful and I think most people would benefit from their help.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards