DLA Troubles - ATOS liars!

clemmatis

krisskross wrote: »

Perhaps DLA should be scrapped altogether then if it is so useless?

Certainly low rate care should go.

Low rate care is going. Of course medium rate care and medium attendance allowance don't meet care costs either -- a hospital insisted my mother go into a nursing home, the matron certified her as a nursing case, but she only got medium care.


Perhaps you'd like to argue for scrapping that too?

Oldernotwiser

wantsajob wrote: »

Does DLA actually fund such help though? For example, someone has difficulty cooking and can only cook microwave meals. They get the low rate DLA of about £20 a week. I couldn't hire a chef for £20 a week. In reality it's just an extra £20 so they can buy Tesco Finest, instead of Tesco value microwave nosh. Or more likely completely subsumed by all other financial requirements of someone on low income. If DLA provided the actual help required, instead of a bit of money - then perhaps it would be viewed in the manner you suggest it should be. The reality is the help required would cost far far more money than what is paid out in DLA.

If people on benefits are buying Tesco's Finest then we're paying too much in benefits to them!

You couldn't hire a chef for £20 a week but you could, if you so wished, pay someone to do a couple of hours' cooking for you which would provide you with home made meals for the week.

Oldernotwiser

DaveHedgehog wrote: »

I don't like the tone of GlasweJen's posts either. Disabled people are vulnerable and in need of help and care, most people would work if they could, the notion that people do not want to work is a fallacy, especially amongst those of us who are educated who have had long standing well paid jobs in the past.

It's amazing how disabled people who don't work are so negative and rude to disabled people who do. They seem to think that they're letting the side down by giving up and living on benefits!

cit_k

Dave101t wrote: »

a medical professional lied?
or a chancer trying to con benefits did?
hmmm....

And a Dave101t from MSE showed a complete inability to read words and comprehend what they mean.

ATOS have admitted the doctor was in the wrong, they have upheld a complaint against the doctor by the claimaint, its in writing.

cit_k

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

It's amazing how disabled people who don't work are so negative and rude to disabled people who do. They seem to think that they're letting the side down by giving up and living on benefits!

Its amazing how many disabled people who work tend to derail threads with thoughtless comments.

eskimo26

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

It's amazing how disabled people who don't work are so negative and rude to disabled people who do. They seem to think that they're letting the side down by giving up and living on benefits!

Your personal opinion is complete nonsense as usual really i was going to say more but why waste my time and energy.

cit_k

Back on topic,

What did atos say about recording? Did they just point blank refuse?

Thats odd, they should trot out the usual line about pro recording equipment etc etc.

Im not sure what the state of play is, but I think, as I expected, the harrington review did more harm than good regarding the recording of medicals, as you for a while were able to request it without problems till harrington messed things up.

Covert recording can be done, dont let them see or they will stop the medical.

You can submit the evidence to a tribunal, it is up the the panel on the tribunal if they allow it as evidence, some will some may not.

No harm in telling the DWP you have the recording, I have successfully won a reconsideration after saying I had one.

I recommend ringing the GMC, and asking them if they think it good practice or not for a doctor to refuse to allow a professional recording, where two copies are made on evidential quality equipment, and he keeps a copy. Especially under the circumstances where it is known the previous assessor lied, and where many others report the same thing.

As said also, see what action ATOS have taken against the doctor, I would report the matter to the GMC anyway regardless let them see if they think whatever action atos took is sufficient.

IF you manage to get it professionally recorded BY ATOS, do your own covert recording too, as they are likely to make you sign a document saying you cant use the recording as evidence for ANYTHING other that obtaining benefits, so cant even submit it to the GMC, nor does it allow you to give a copy to the media to expose corruption, or upload to youtube etc.

DaveHedgehog

cit_k wrote: »

Back on topic,

What did atos say about recording? Did they just point blank refuse?

Thats odd, they should trot out the usual line about pro recording equipment etc etc.

I called them earlier and explained I'd received a letter saying sorry from ATOS and I asked if I could record the latest assessment, the man on the phone said that an asessment wouldnt take place in such circumstances, or words to that effect, I asked if it was to protect the doctors, he said no, I said who then? He said all parties involved.

cit_k

DaveHedgehog wrote: »

I called them earlier and explained I'd received a letter saying sorry from ATOS and I asked if I could record the latest assessment, the man on the phone said that an asessment wouldnt take place in such circumstances, or words to that effect, I asked if it was to protect the doctors, he said no, I said who then? He said all parties involved.

You need to do everything in writing with ATOS, you already know their capability for lies, so anything they say on the phone could be denied at a later date by them.

I will see if I can find out a bit more about current state of play re recordings, its for DLA which is not what Im usually into, but should be similar rules for any assessment really.

cit_k

Out of interest, at your last DLA assessment (as I have never had a DLA one) did the assessor offer to show you a copy of the full medical report before it was sent to the DWP decision maker?

It could be a useful point to complain about if he did not, or the next one does not.