Failed Medical Stats.

passatrider

What annoys me more than anything else about threads like this is it brings out the so called 'experts' who seem to be part of the 'pull your socks up brigade'

I know it's a public forum and all that but making assumptions about someone elses situation without actually knowing the full facts is in my opinion very narrow minded.

Please think about the other person before you jump on the 'Daily Mail' hate campaign against people who are geniunely in need!

Tehya

Skinticket wrote: »

sorry for going a little off topic, but i have a query regarding ESA...

i get esa and have some of it deducted because my wife claims carers allowance, she only gets £41 CA as she has some deducted for a social fund loan, my question is, should should my ESA be changed or is it correct that my esa stays the same?

Sorry if I've not understood your question correctly.

Even when you and your wife are receiveing different benefits you are still assessed as a couple so any money owed to the DWP will be taken into account from the joint income of both of you.

So in other words, yes the deductions are correct because if your ESA went up to replace the social fund loan repayments, you as a couple, would not actually be paying it back.

stazi

cit-k

So, now that you've reported both DWP & ATOS to the GMC for breaking their rules, no doubt the GMC will take action to stop it.

cit_k

stazi wrote: »

cit-k

So, now that you've reported both DWP & ATOS to the GMC for breaking their rules, no doubt the GMC will take action to stop it.

Report is going in after tribunal, I dont want it to be seen as a vexatious report, nor to risk them thinking I am trying to influence the tribunal etc.

The GMC have already stated they will investigate any complaint of this nature, however, they have also said they would be powerless to force a company wide (ie ATOS wide) change as they only have jurisdiction so to speak over individual assessors. They said it would have to be taken higher, they did give the name of the place, but my memory sucks I would have to get back in touch later with them to find out more about escalation, as obviously retrospectively taking action against individual assessors is a waste of every ones time, when it needs to be ATOS / DWP who the action is taken against to ensure they are not requiring doctors etc break their own regulation.

At the same time of course, and assessor who does breach the rule deserves everything that is coming to them.

In my case, I am quite sure the GMC will be interested not only in that breach (no copy of report) but also in the fact the assessor (and atos) specifically prohibited me from sending in reliable evidence of any failings on their part to the GMC. Good job I also have that in writing AND on tape....

I doubt ANY professional body would be impressed by the deliberate covering up of evidence by ATOS and the DWP (who hire them).

healy

stazi wrote: »

cit-k

So, now that you've reported both DWP & ATOS to the GMC for breaking their rules, no doubt the GMC will take action to stop it.

That is the funniest thing I have read for a long time!

stazi

Healy

Glad I put a smile on your face! Also glad that cit_k is taking action about this injustice!.

jonty1970

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

So she can get on the bus if there's a question of losing money if she doesn't.

What does that mean? She is ill and cannot work at the moment. She needs help and support.

She is too ill most of the time to do anything. So in your opinon, because she can get on a bus, twice in the last 6 months, she can go on jobseekers and look for a job, and then hold down a job! :mad:

Why do people like you come on these forums to make unhelpful, judgemental comments?

jonty1970

I'll tell her to put that on her CV. "Can use the bus" Bound to put her head and shoulders above the other applicants
And maybe her psychiatrist should be using this theory when diagnosing people like my sister - Can use a bus = cured! !!!!!!! some people!
And the big joke is, that this is a question that is used to make decisions on peoples' benefits!