transfering from ib to esa

UnderPressure

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

I think the figures from the Transfer Trial were 71% passed and 29% failed, however, you cannot assume you will pass just because you passed the PCA, the physical tests have many differences from the PCA ones, and the mental tests bear no resenblance.

If you want to pass you need to undestand the WCA tests, not what is written on the ESA50, and look at how your disabilities map to each one.

Sorry as well, your figures are massively wrong or you have them the wrong way round

This is from the dog's mouth so to speak:

For all new ESA Claims from 27th October 2008 to 30th November 2009, the result of the initial WCA is as follows:
o Support Group - 6%
o Work Related Activity Group -14%
o Fit for Work - 39%
o Claim closed before assessment complete - 37%
o Assessment still in progress - 4%

As you can see nowhere near 71% passed!

UnderPressure

Here are some better stats published April 2011:

For all new ESA Claims from 27th October 2008 to 31st August 2010, the result of the initial WCA is as follows (proportions do not sum exactly to 100% due to rounding):

Support Group – 6%

Work Related Activity Group – 16%

Fit for Work – 39%

Claim closed before assessment complete – 36%

Assessment still in progress – 2%

source:

http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/workingage/esa_wca/esa_wca_27042011.pdf

Still shocking really and will these stats have some transfer claimants in? Upto 31st August 2011?

Cpt.Scarlet

UnderPressure wrote: »

Sorry as well, your figures are massively wrong or you have them the wrong way round

This is from the dog's mouth so to speak:

For all new ESA Claims from 27th October 2008 to 30th November 2009, the result of the initial WCA is as follows:
o Support Group - 6%
o Work Related Activity Group -14%
o Fit for Work - 39%
o Claim closed before assessment complete - 37%
o Assessment still in progress - 4%

As you can see nowhere near 71% passed!

There was a trial transfer of IB claimants in Burnley and Aberdeen at the end of last year, the figures I quoted are from that!!!

UnderPressure

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

There was a trial transfer of IB claimants in Burnley and Aberdeen at the end of last year, the figures I quoted are from that!!!

Ahhh I see

I have now added some further figures that cover the period to 31 August 2010. They are equally damning and within these am I right in thinking there WOULD be some claimants in the transfer process?

UnderPressure

I have just noticed in my stats it does say NEW claims mmmmmmmmm I wonder.....

Cannot seem to find any stats related to transfer I wonder if a freedom of information request would apply here??
I am sure it would make interesting reading and hopefully put a lot of peoples minds at rest the whole expecting to fail the medical seems to becoming the norm.

Also what makes ATOS muppets better qualified than GP's and hospital conultants PAID and EMPLOYED already by the government!!!! Is it because they work with the "truth" and ATOS work with targets and financial incentives???

Cpt.Scarlet

UnderPressure wrote: »

Ahhh I see

I have now added some further figures that cover the period to 31 August 2010. They are equally damning and within these am I right in thinking there WOULD be some claimants in the transfer process?

The IB transfer started in mid April 2011 with the first transferess completeing the process in late June, so the figures you have mentioned do not include any IB to ESA transfers.

NASA_2

UnderPressure wrote: »

Why not? How can it be reasonable of the government to say ok on Moday you passed the IB medical and here is your benefit ans you are not capable of work, then on Wednesday say sorry you failed the "new" medical and regardless of what has happened in the past now you are miraculously fit to work!

Tell me does that sound correct to you? Does it even sound fair? The government are aiming to get 1 million people off IB are they saying they have been dishing out benefits to people who are in fact fit for work and the whole system failed? Or is it more a case of ATOS advising the government on the face of it incorrectly in order to gain more commercial success? Something stinks that is for sure!

Is it fair? Not for me to answer.

It is fact though that this is going to happen and that it is reasonable to assume that more people will 'fail' the WCA when they had passed the PCA.

The rest of your post is irrelevant.

Cpt.Scarlet

UnderPressure wrote: »

Also what makes ATOS muppets better qualified than GP's and hospital conultants PAID and EMPLOYED already by the government!!!! Is it because they work with the "truth" and ATOS work with targets and financial incentives???

You GP assesses your overall health and your ability to work in a broad sense. The ATOS "muppets" assess you capability to complete 17 specific tests, they have no interest about your capabilities or disabilities outside of these.

The biggest mistake ESA claimants make is not realising this.

NASA_2

These are the initial stats on the trial of IB(R) - As can be seen the majority of people are moved over to ESA on one of the two components:

Results
As of the 22nd March, 1,626 decisions on whether a customer’s claim qualifies for conversion to Employment and Support Allowance had been made. Of these:
• 526 individuals (32%) were found fit for work and so not entitled to Employment and Support Allowance
• 484 individuals (30%) were placed in the Support Group
• 616 individuals (38%) were placed in the Work Related Activity Group

Glen_Clark

cit_k wrote: »

Along comes Mr Freud who is an ex-investment banker, who of the top of his head, lies blatently about made up fraud levels.

I heard him on Radio 4. The only basis he has for his assertion of widespread fraud is that sickness benefit claims have greatly increased.
But there are other factors he simply ignored. Like the increase in the gap between rich and poor, and increased stress levels caused by insecurity of employment and high levels of debt and crime. Its a well proven fact that poverty and stress does make people ill, but this was completely ignored.

I know a guy on sickness benefit. Some people seeing him walking down the street would think he could get a job. Well he might be able to do a job of sorts, but he certainly wouldn't get a job because he is only trained for manual work, and there are so many younger and fitter men looking for work he would never be offered a job. So, in reality, it is still his poor health that is preventing him from working. But the test appears to make no distinction between being fit enough to do a job, and fit enough to get a job.