Been called for medical - not happy

Muttleythefrog

zoominatorone wrote: »

You mean like ways to cheat and manipulate the system? Sure looks like it from where I am sitting.

You should see what I tell people in private on here... it'd leave you fuming. Things like 'fill in the form fully and accurately, use the additional information section to add any additional information you feel relevant and not already stated', 'it may be worth appealling if you feel you qualify for the benefit.. check the descriptors and decide which ones you think apply to you and therefore whether you think you should qualify'.. but perhaps most damning of all I say things like this 'your entitlement will be determined by the descriptors and those alone.. anything else is a sideshow'. When I had 4 police officers knocking on my door earlier this afternoon (genuinely true.. asking about an incident in the street) I thought the game was up. It's worth stating that much of the advice people seek regarding ESA is because they've been given no information or incorrect information from DWP staff to whom they should be referring for the information.

FBaby

It is sad that filling in a form to provide information to allow for a decision to be made has become a procedural exercise for the claimant who as such is providing their own assessment. It only leaves ATOS with the opportunity to challenge the assessment, by which they are then being accused of assuming the claimant is lying.

mazza111

The forms for ESA and DLA can both be confusing and terribly long along with very repetitive. You must look at the descriptors that fit your illness. Anything else is either ignored or is waffle. Everyone should look at these when applying for ESA, it's not like IB that was easier to get. Why shouldn't anyone point that out on the forums?? I can't believe anyone was on IB for 22 years without a medical. I was on it for a few months and was called for a medical.

When I done my dd's form for DLA, I felt i was writing the same thing over and over again. And it had to be done over a period of a few days due to neither of us having good hands to write with :rotfl:

I for one appreciate every little bit of advice that Muttley is able to give with regards to benefits, as it's a minefield, especially for those of us who've rarely had to claim before. Things have changed so drastically since I last claimed, I'm just so glad there are people like Muttley and RogerBlack, who are willing to give up their time and energy to help those of us who don't understand the procedures.

Muttleythefrog

FBaby wrote: »

It is sad that filling in a form to provide information to allow for a decision to be made has become a procedural exercise for the claimant who as such is providing their own assessment. It only leaves ATOS with the opportunity to challenge the assessment, by which they are then being accused of assuming the claimant is lying.

Well the ESA50 is simply one piece of evidence in the process. The questions on it are designed to extract the information relevant to the WCA (along with other background information like diagnosis).. unfortunately like most of these such things they aren't entirely ideal in their design... ATOS have responsibility to provide advice to the DWP which is also very specific to the WCA criteria.. they are entitled to reject or seek corroboration of claimant evidence as they see fit. When a medical is instructed it means they feel they do not have sufficient information in order to provide their advice... when GP is consulted it means they're seeking corroboration. After all that the DWP DM can make their decision based on all this evidence... usually it is in line with the ATOS advice. I would think the number of decision made based solely on what the claimant says are minimal and probably will include supporting medical evidence sent in... even in cases of terminal illness corroboration is sought. At my last reassessment I included an ATOS medical report (from face to face medical), ESA50 fully completed and several other pieces of medical evidence like risk assessment from CPN... ATOS determined that was insufficient and sought corroboration from GP... what confuses me is that they got conflicting information from GP and ignored it... fortunately for me.

As per previous recommendation I'd remove the need for the claimant to complete odious forms like the ESA50... I think documents like this can in effect become a test of who is fittest for the process rather than who is fit for work.

System

topaziem wrote: »

The claim is made, then it is up to the DWP to prove on the balance of probabilities that the claim is either accepted or rejected. They are the ones that have to do the work, not the claimant..

I agree with you. And until there is a result from their investigations and a result declared then no benefit will be payable.
As the claimant will not be co-operating then each claim could drag on for months, if not years, while they gather the evidence.
Two can play at that game

atrixblue.-MFR-.

topaziem wrote: »

Of course the benefit will be paid. It will be paid at the assessment rate until the DWP get their act together and make a decision.

It wouldn't be in the DWP's interest to drag it out for as long as they do they will have to pay up. They can only stop payment if the decision is a fail. Then you appeal and go straight back onto the benefit for say 12 months whilst you await a hearing. You can't lose!

People do not realise that they have a tremendous amount of power in the law that can be used against the system. Most bottle it just because it is a government department.

If I was you I would read up on the regulations relating to ESA before making your silly comments

you are confused between LAW and LEGISLATION.

carefull how you word things, if you want to breakdown the difference, LAW is the magnacarta this was made many moons ago and cannot be altered or precendented in anyway (the governement has challenged it and lost), legislation and ACTS is what is passed through parliamant.

ESA is not part of legislation through parliamant, its part of a bill, there within that bill resides REGULATIONS.

whether those regulations breaks legislation and makes that regulation ILLEGAL, is one to be challenged through the courts under human rights ACT if theres agood enough argument to get it to court, this will be a test case if you or i wish to challenge the government.

so we come back to your comment about having the powers in LAW, no you have to challenge the regulations and make sure they are upkept, law doesnt come into it.

if you can provide me with facts, to back up your claims i will look at them, and then get back to you.

i get your arguement about the DWP have to fact find themselfs, but this boils down to who can play the most stubborn game between department and claimant, a decision maker is not duty bound to be a fact finder by contacting GP or what ever, the facts can be laid out in a claim form, withing that form he/she becomes the fact finder in refuring the claim before medical advisers, there the decision maker will ask for facts and advice to your claims in the form most offen the facts presented back to the DM are different to the facts on the claim form or inconsistancies, he/she then refures your case to Atos for more advise, this is when ESA50 comes in, if you fill out the basics, then expect a medical, this is Fact finding by their standards.

the question remains why would someone claiming ESA put themselfs in a position where by they would probably either not get awarded as facts provided by you are disproved due to basic information, or the wrong decision in what place of ESA is made because of a lack of fact?

idealy you would want to make it plain sailing for yourself with less worry if you have all the relevant documentation such as reports and medical back up from qualified specialists, so the decision maker see's the facts see's the evidence, and that a prompt decision is made and amore accurate award is given, without the hassle of going to medical, without the hassle of going onto tribunal.

you have seem to have personel issues regarding DWP-who hasnt, but not everyone will share your view.

Morglin

You can request formal recording of an assessment, which was recommended by Harrington and accepted by the government:

http://dwpexamination.wordpress.com/atos-will-record-your-assessment/

Lin

Invalidation

LadyMorticia wrote: »

If someone has been on IB for 22 years, I find it unfathomable that they haven't had a medical in that time (unless they are severely disabled i.e. can't talk and walk or do anything for themselves. Almost like a shell, if that makes sense? I'm really trying not to be offensive so not sure how to put my point across.:o).

I thought that everyone would have a medical at some point whilst being on incapacity benefits, even if it's only one medical in however long you've been claiming for. I know that HRC DLA used to exempt you from the medicals though so if the OP received HRC DLA in that time then that might explain why but it's just something I find it hard to get my head around (without trying to sound judgmental.:o).

Well get your head around it. Some of us were lumbered with useless GP's or health Authorities who lost all our records.

I'm no shell either, and tried on 2 occasions to work, on the last try I fell, my hand went through a window severing some nerves and tendons in my right hand.

Ive been on High rate care and High rate Mobility since 2 days after DLA stared and previous to that Full IB and IS.
Ive got 3 collapsed discs at the base of my spine.
I had some scans and discagrams in 1993/4 then had a visit from a DLA appointed Doctor and then from a DSS official in 1994 and was classified by them as 'Disabled for Life'

Despite my demands my GP refused to send me for any more scans saying they would be a waste of public money, and there was nothing that could be done
We moved house and GP's and got dumped with an even more useless GP so I had a private MRI that confirmed my problem.
My doctors response? he referred me to a pain clinic. HAHAHAHAHA
WE moved house again and GP's and the Health authority successfully managed to lose all my original scans along with those I paid for, Great.

So dont get your drawers in a twist about people not having medicals in over 20 years, it happens with some conditions where its obvious there will be no improvement, then the system and GP's dump you and youre on your own.

Fortunately, we moved house again and Hampshire Social Services (where we moved to) have been brilliant as has my recent move to a new GP surgery

Invalidation

Dunroamin wrote: »

The question of "entitlement" just goes round in circles. If someone's claim is accepted then they can be seen to be entitled and all the help is justified. However, if the claim is rejected, people then get cross when it's pointed out that they're not actually entitled.

But simply because they get rejected doesnt mean they are still not entitled.
THATS THE PROBLEM

Invalidation

topaziem wrote: »

Guidance?? This forum is a benefit cheaters 'guidance' manual!

So why are you here then? to troll or wind people up?

Helping people with the technicalities of a deliberatly obtuse and complicated system is doing nothing wrong.

HMG, DWP and ATOS dont play by the rules, lie through their teeth and obfuscate their system