Incapacity Benefit migration to ESA

NEH

Chrysalis wrote: »

does anyone else find it not quite right that they want to remove age addition on IB/ESA but yet are increasing the single room age limit to 35 on LHA. Young people seem to be specifically targeted for negative changes.

Well as i said earlier in this thread it's the young people who have been unable to work in the beginning due to their illness that i think will suffer the most....You end up not getting many NI contributions due to sporadic work patterns so you're not eligible for that part of ESA and if you've then gone on to find a partner with these changes you're considered a dependent on them which puts pressure on already tight budgets as the threshold for losing ESA is if your partner earns £16,000....If you're paying rent or a mortgage half or more of that £16,000 goes on that alone and if certain young people don't get any disability help financially it's going to put added pressure on those budgets....

I'm one of those that when i can work i work and when i really can't i can't but my NI record cause of this is shot to pieces and i know that with these changes i have to become reliant on my OH...I'm even wondering if it's worth bothering going through all the stress of the medical and if it's worth using up the CAB's time to help with the forms if it just means i won't get it. It's not like you can explain to them that due to the recession my husband's wage is unreliable and can vary from month to month....

As for jobs being available i know the local supermarkets won't take me....I once worked at a national retail chain on the tills at least 10 years ago and even then they were starting to take away the checkout only roles, i had to keep explaining that i couldn't do shop floor work or shelf stacking which cause problems...now the supermarkets very rarely take someone for less than 16 hours let alone 10 or less and i wouldn't be able to take a checkout role as it involves the shelf stacking and floor part as well....

To me these changes make the benefit system black and white if you're god forbid in a grey area then well tough starve seems to be the approach...I'm concerned that a lot of disabled and sick people will fall into those grey areas...

Scared45

Today I wrote to the DWP, asking them why I'm being migrated to ESA just 5 months after my award letter which states I'll be reviewed in November 2013, and against their own Mar 2011 guidelines.

I'm keeping a copy and if I get no joy from them I'll ask my M.P. to speak with them.

pinklady21

Well done you!
Wishing you the best of luck - the DWP are likely to be getting a very similar letter from me too in the very near future!!
Pinklady21

charley11

richard9991 wrote: »

probably because that review date was for incap and you are being reassesd for esa i think they have scrapped all incap review dates and are starting with a clean slate.

Hi I dont think they have scrapped all review dates for IB when goverment guidlines for migration for people on IB to ESA indicates that you will be assessed on or as near your review date that you have for IB

charley11

pinklady21 wrote: »

Charley
Thanks for that - sounds like the system really is not working the way the politicians and the DWP's own published guidance are telling us it should.....

I agree with you, when the Job Centre call you as the first stage after receipt of the initial letter, they are reading from a scipt. Frankly they do not tell you anything that is not already in the letter sent, and if you ask them any questions the response is
"well this is very new to us too..."

Doesn't inspire confidence!!

I saw a post on this board from someone in the BBC who is investigating the ESA process - might be worth contacting her with our stories:

[EMAIL="rachel.davies@bbc.co.uk"]rachel.davies@bbc.co.uk[/EMAIL]
tel 0161 244 3076

It is quite scandalous to expect people who have just gone through the stress of a review (and I don't care what anyone says, they are EXTREMELY stressful and difficult as there is always the threat of your income being taken away) to go through another one soon afterwards. How much is this costing the tax payer? Wasn't part of the point of this entire exercise to save money?

I know the ESA test is different and harder to get through, but I have a condition for which there is no cure, and in setting a review date so far into the future, the DWP clearly concurs with this, so quite how I am supposed to suddenly recover enough to be fit for work is quite beyond me!!

I am going to request the details of my last review - how many points I got etc etc. and then advise the IB office that I think they have made an error in calling me back so soon.
How hard is it going to be to get them to accept that though?

BTW to the person who posted and said they were on pension credit - I don't think people above pension age are being called for the ESA reassessment test they are one of the few groups that are exempt.

pinklady21

Hi,

I recieved my forms to fill in on Friday.I am still waiting for the Gentleman at the IB who is trying to find out who changed my review date from 3 years to six months.I will call them tomorrow and see if there has been any progress.I diid call again last week and asked if there had been any update but the girl informed me that she thinks there might have been a computer error, but she is not sure.They guy who is looking into it for me has contacted the person who changed the date but still has not recieved a reply.If i dont get a good reason for the change i will be contacting my MP and other relevant bodies to complain but at the end of the day i dont think it will make a difference.I will say it again there was a reason i was given a 3 year review date in November and how the DWP can just dismiss the information they were given from Atos then is beyond me but everyone knows that people on Benefits are treated like second class citizens.For me now the issue is why someone changed my review date when it was decided i should not be assessed for three years Was the person who changed my details qualified in looking at them and assessing that i could be assessed again, and if so why.

Bye

melbury

Medical assessments are done very regularly for ESA claimants. My OH has had two in the past 9 months and even though he has now been put in the Support Group, he will undoubtedly get called again in a couple of months and we will have to start the whole process again of filling in the ESA50, attending the medical and then appealing.

It is relentless and exhausting.

anguk

melbury wrote: »

Medical assessments are done very regularly for ESA claimants. My OH has had two in the past 9 months and even though he has now been put in the Support Group, he will undoubtedly get called again in a couple of months and we will have to start the whole process again of filling in the ESA50, attending the medical and then appealing.

It is relentless and exhausting.

I sometimes wonder if they're just trying to wear people down so they give up claiming.

My OH is really stressing about this as he knows (and his doctors know) that there's no way he'd be able to work. I don't think he'll fail his medical, in fact I'm not even sure he has to have one as he's on the exempt list? but I have warned him that it looks like the majority fail but then win their appeal.

One thing I don't understand is if so many people win their appeal surely that means that ATOS got the medical findings wrong? How much money is being wasted on all these incorrect decisions going to appeal? And why are so many people failing their medical just to have that overturned on appeal? It seems to be just one giant bureaucratic mess to me.

NASA_2

The majority do not win their appeal - the department wins most of the appeals. Thankfully.

septemberblues

Chrysalis wrote: »

I think pinklady you are just very unlucky.

My initial thoughts were they were going to prioritise on age. Basically do the youngest first and the oldest last, and the very oldest not been migrated at all, basically those close to pension age. There would be various reasons for this including the fact that the youngest get age additions and as such will have the biggest reductions migrating to ESA as ESA has no age additions, and they are probably seen as the most vulnerable age group in that young people are more likely to be found fit for work on the new assessment.

I think they are calling people alphabetically, my surname starts with B and I have already had a letter and a phone call. im now waiting for the dreaded form!

IB had written to me to say that I was exempt because of my illness, so its anybody and everybody, my daughter who had gone straight into the Support Group because of her illness has already been asked to fill in ESA forms again, when she asked why was she exempt 6 months ago with the exact same illness that she has now, she was told to fill in the forms anyway as no-one is exempt now.

bertiebat

septemberblues wrote: »

I think they are calling people alphabetically, my surname starts with B and I have already had a letter and a phone call. im now waiting for the dreaded form!

IB had written to me to say that I was exempt because of my illness, so its anybody and everybody, my daughter who had gone straight into the Support Group because of her illness has already been asked to fill in ESA forms again, when she asked why was she exempt 6 months ago with the exact same illness that she has now, she was told to fill in the forms anyway as no-one is exempt now.

One thing I'm sure on is that they are NOT calling people in alphabetically. If they really were using this method, the deed-poll office for surname changes would be very busy!

I have heard that they are calling in IB exempt cases in first and this would explain why you have been selected now. I expect that they want to see how many cases can be dealt with purely on good and up to date medical evidence without the need for an actual medical. Though I think most will indeed be called in for medicals anyway so that they can say everybody was checked thoroughly.

Cynically I thought that they may call the contributions based claimants first, as these will time limited to one year if allocated to the WRAG, but maybe they didn't want to grind the appeal courts to a complete stand still! It hadn't occurred to me that reviewing in age order would also have some merit.

I think the reviews will mostly be based on next IB review dates (where given) which is what has been stated as the processing order.