Sums up ATOS

vision2009

Good article here
http://mikesivier.wordpress.com/2012/12/01/only-you-can-close-the-atos-slaughterhouse/

Invalidation

What it needs is a lot of DP's who have suffered at the hands of ATOS to get a class action together. Hit them hard

rogerblack

Invalidation wrote: »

What it needs is a lot of DP's who have suffered at the hands of ATOS to get a class action together. Hit them hard

Class actions don't really work that way in the UK.
You can't start an action, and then advertise for people to join it.
The people with a problem have to start the action as a fully formed group.

A large fraction of the unfairnesses that exist with ATOS would unfortunately exist without ATOS, barring a massive shift in government policy.
ATOS are given a budget.
They employ HCPs, and perform assessments.
Unless there is a massive increase in budget, the assessments will still be rushed, leading to inaccuracies, and the people doing the assessment will have little better understanding of the conditions they are assessing.

There will still be the unfairness that comes from the lack of consideration of whether there is any chance of employment, and the difficulties of the current system in capturing multiple disabilities and pain.

If you employ a workman, and he builds a slipshod wall, and carries on doing so for several years without you complaining really hard - you have the lions share of the blame.

colin13

I thought ,ATOS only did the medical,then a. Civil servant,made the decision,are you saying ATOS is passing on wrong info,,surley not :)

rogerblack

colin13 wrote: »

I thought ,ATOS only did the medical,then a. Civil servant,made the decision,are you saying ATOS is passing on wrong info,,surley not :)

Are ATOS less efficient and reliable than they could be with the resources they have - I would certainly argue so.

Barring a massive change of government policy, or more funding - could any organisation do hugely better - I have extreme doubts.

Richie-from-the-Boro

They don't need more funding to increase their efficiency [reduction of successful appeals] objectives. The government for most of this year have been systematically reducing income to representative welfare organisations and the Legal Aid system, in the the case of the CAB reducing their effectiveness by withdrawal of contracts, leaving the population with an inadequate opportunity for justice. This by definition means that getting representation to take on ATOS or DWP at pre or post appeal level is almost non-pre-existant. For most paying from your own pocket to fight the legal system for your citizens right to benefits is an economic 'pipe dream'.

A week tomorrow ATOS and the DWP get the biggest boost they could wish for with the passing of the LASPO bill [statutory instrument], this when enacted will have a crushing effect on the disabled society chance to get justice. Appealing across the whole range of DWP benefit activities is an excessively expensive exercise, (1) denying the population represented access to law wrongly denies -people their lawful right to legal representation. (2) Denying their right to legal representation - denies them their right to the reinstatement of their wrongly removed benefit entitlement.

They don't need more funding to reduce successful appeals and therefore increase their efficiency objectives, they just need Ken Clark, who in addition to pushing the LASPO bill recently said "these welfare benefit cases only needed a bit of 'generalist advice'", yeh right, apposite dovetailing of descriptors doesn't come from 'generalists' no matter how helpful and dedicated they are. By April 2013 legal representation [PIP then UC] will conveniently have been dissolved by this corrosive legislation and will be those providing help with Housing / Welfare Benefits / Debt advice / CAB / Solicitors / Law Centres will be neutralised. This LASPO bill will again discriminate against the disabled, a further 650,000 people currently have access to justice will not have it any longer.

- now .......... that's how ATOS become even more efficient !

NOTES :

- "wrongly removed benefit entitlement" .. .. because with representation almost 80% get it reinstated
- "IB transitioning appeals" .. .. the CAB are up 40% year on year appeals
- "revolving door" .. .. there are almost 4.5m individuals constantly awaiting assessment
- funding for the not-for-profit law centres will be cut by 77%
- 800 specialist advice centres will be lost
- even the ermine voted by 237 to 198 to keep legal aid for appeals against welfare benefit decisions, but were conDEM'd.

rogerblack

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- "wrongly removed benefit entitlement" .. .. because with representation almost 80% get it reinstated
- "IB transitioning appeals" .. .. the CAB are up 40% year on year appeals
- "revolving door" .. .. there are almost 4.5m individuals constantly awaiting assessment
- funding for the not-for-profit law centres will be cut by 77%
- 800 specialist advice centres will be lost
- even the ermine voted by 237 to 198 to keep legal aid for appeals against welfare benefit decisions, but were conDEM'd.

Also the new sanctions regimen meaning people who can't do work related activity will need advice, which is getting harder to obtain.
And the mandatory reconsideration of appeals which will add another hurdle you have to pass to lodge an appeal, and things get nastier.

How is someone who may be barely literate, or have other issues leading to problems with forms supposed to explain the reason why they were unable to perform work related activity, in terms that make their appeal legitimate, and able to proceed?

Invalidation

rogerblack wrote: »

Class actions don't really work that way in the UK.
You can't start an action, and then advertise for people to join it.

That wasnt whatI said, please dont confuse my statements

The people with a problem have to start the action as a fully formed group.

THAT was what I suggested

If you employ a workman, and he builds a slipshod wall, and carries on doing so for several years without you complaining really hard - you have the lions share of the blame.

YOu do talk a load of twaddle sometimes.
What about all those people who took class actions about Asbestos and Mesothelioma , years after the fact, what about the miners and Pneumoconiosis and their class actions, what about Thalidomide and those peoples actions?. Did they conveniently slip your mind.
There is NO reason whatsoever that anyone being returned to work by ATOS/DWP against the word of a qualified Medical practitioner, and subsequently injuring themselves or simply making their condition worse could not join together and take a class action against ATOS and the DWP.

Seeing many of your replies on this Forum 'Mr Black' (Hows Mr White and Mr Green BTW?) one could almost start to think you were an advisor for ATOS.

Aint life strange?

TAKE A LOOK AROUND PEOPLE
Take a look at how many websites ATOS have had closed down for speaking out against them? Another great site supporting DP's was shut down yesterday

Yorkist

There are so many 'mistakes' being made every day within this system that institutional discrimination would appear to be not only a viable suspicion but, quite probably, the ONLY viable explanation for the way the government and Atos are responding to a situation that they have been made aware of by so many different representative bodies.
Everybody who feels that they have been treated in a different manner than an able bodied person would expect to have been treated should write to their MP immediately explaining this discrimination.
Do research. I've read that Atos have been informed that their web site breaches standards on accuracy, that they have been told to make changes but have failed to do so. I'm currently looking into this.
My response to the original questionaire included detailed reports from HPS's, some undoubtedly far more qualified in their own field than most HPC's working for Atos, who had undertaken physical examinations on myself. Despite this I was informed I was fit for work. Nobody from Atos has seen me yet. I have sought advice and been told that any HCP who has been found to have ignored evidence gained during an examination undertaken by another duely qualified HCP, without having themselves performed any requisite examination in order to inform their decision, would appear to be guilty of gross dereliction of duty and be liable to sanction from their representative body. Depending on circumstances they may also be liable to legal action.
The BMA and other representative bodies WILL take seriously complaints of malpractice and descrimination. They are not 'best friends' with either the government or Atos over this situation.
RB is correct, if somewhat pedantic, in saying that one cannot bring a 'class action' case under British law. A huge mass of evidence can trigger 'enquiries', Judicial Review, etc. but these are not, legally, 'class actions'. A substantial mass of evidence and public concern can lead to changes. That is why its IMPERATIVE that everybody with concerns writes to their MP, whatever party affiliation they have, giving evidence of genuine harm done by the procces where applicable. WE ARE HUMANS TOO.:T Yorkist.

Richie-from-the-Boro

Invalidation """look at how many websites ATOS have had closed down for speaking out""" if you, and others, only knew the truth. There is a parallel historical model, well documented that plot for plot exactly mimics :

- the politics
- establishment support
- legislative support
- courts reinforcement

First mentioned by IDS in the summer of 2010 in a TV interview, and never ever spoken of since. I've had more than several treads mysteriously [STRIKE]dissapeared[/STRIKE] pulled on this site going back to 2012 where the phrase was mentioned. No flack from 'the team' .. but .. quietly laundered nevertheless. Its fair to mention at that time the original Andy&Flo were very prolific in everyone's posts including mine, that could have been a contributing factor.

Many involved in those threads at the are still daily posters here on this site, and seen several times most weeks.

Richie-from-the-Boro

rogerblack wrote: »

Are ATOS less efficient and reliable than they could be with the resources they have - I would certainly argue so.

Barring a massive change of government policy, or more funding - could any organisation do hugely better - I have extreme doubts.

rogerblack,

C'mon my mate, ATOS are not inefficient, they are absolutely 100% efficient at what they are tasked to do. If they had 100.000 more staff each fully motivated and earning 100 times their annual salary they would achieve the same organisational outcomes, which are .. ..

Only 13 out of 100 of fit~to~work initial assessment [pre appeal] are allowed to score sufficient points or the assessor is sacked, that's their individual - group - and organisational target - no exceptions, or you're sacked for missing your [PBR] targets.

Contriving 'pass rate targets' within their compass to wrongly deny the citizens of this state and its islands benefits they are by law entitled to by, way of a state funded private sector activity is just plain wrong.