DLA Troubles - ATOS liars!

Fridge3

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

Fridge3

I must thank you for your posts, it's been a while since I have had such a good laugh!

No problem. There's a thanks button for that too.

Fridge3

FTW wrote: »

They also don't need to be particularly medically competent in that particular section of Atos

So are you stating as a fact that there's no medical competencies in the job description that have to be met before being able to carry out esa assessments? Or is that the reason you were selective enough in your wording to include 'particularly'?

FTW

Fridge3 wrote: »

So are you stating as a fact that there's no medical competencies in the job description that have to be met before being able to carry out esa assessments? Or is that the reason you were selective enough in your wording to include 'particularly'?

Comprehension...

Sorry, what's your own experience of these assessments again?

Fridge3

FTW wrote: »

Not that they're any good at it.

So you agree, it's a fact they're there to contribute to benefits eligability by way of assessment, not cure or even diagnose medical conditions, rather assess what can be done in relation to working.

Whether they're any good at it is a matter of opinion and contrary to what you may think there are people who've had positive experiences of the assessments.

FTW

Fridge3 wrote: »

So you agree, it's a fact they're there to contribute to benefits eligability by way of assessment, not cure or even diagnose medical conditions, rather assess what can be done in relation to working.

No, it's not agreed - especially the underlined last part. But what's your own experience of these assessments that enables you to say that?

Fridge3 wrote: »

Whether they're any good at it is a matter of opinion and contrary to what you may think there are people who've had positive experiences of the assessments.

What's your own experience of these assessments that enables you to say that as well?

Fridge3

FTW wrote: »

They have to be 100% biased, and look after the client interest first (a privilege the patient never gets) - otherwise their contract simply wouldn't continue.

You have evidence of this claim of course? ...No, thought not because, it's a biased opinion.

As you well know, atos are bound by regulations that state the contrary.

Fridge3

FTW wrote: »

Comprehension...

So, it's a fact that medical competencies in the job description have to be met before being able to carry out esa assessments.

FTW

Fridge3 wrote: »

You have evidence of this claim of course? ...No, thought not because, it's a biased opinion.

As you well know, atos are bound by regulations that state the contrary.

Yes, business interests mean they have to be biased - their chief interest is the client, not the patient, because it's the client who pays them.

So, whatever the client says, is what goes.

But why ask questions, and then proceed to answer them yourself?

Actually, here's a question - what's your own experience of these assessments?

FTW

Fridge3 wrote: »

So, it's a fact that medical competencies in the job description have to be met before being able to carry out esa assessments.

Depends on who's doing the vetting. Atoss' vetting clearly needs looking at.

Speaking of looking at things - try looking at the question 'What's your own experience of these assessments?', and then try to answer it.

Fridge3

FTW wrote: »

No, it's not agreed - especially the underlined last part.

OK, you don't agree. But it's a fact they're there to contribute to benefits eligability by way of assessment, not cure or even diagnose medical conditions, rather assess what can be done in relation to working.

You appear not to like this fact, don't you?