Ask Atos Healthcare disability assessment questions

damo24

Fridge3 wrote: »

Your 31% and 39% do not relate to the post you quoted.

Table3 C88 / Table1a J103 = Initial decisions overturned to date / Total caseload to date = 4.5%

I'm so pleased to see that (as usual) you are cherry picking parts of posts to challenge. Let's start with your maths but before we do we should bear in mind Table 3 J88: "Outcomes of appeals heard on Fit for Work decisions in the initial functional assessment: initial decision overturned [to date]: 37%".

Either the person compiling the spreadsheet has made a mistake in the figures or your maths is wrong which is something I can prove.

Your calculations are based on the figure in Table 1a, cell J103 which is the Total caseload to date. The problem with using that figure is that this also includes what the compiler classifies as "Status of claims where functional assessment has not been completed" in other words applicants who are still undergoing the initial assessment.

Unless you can prove otherwise I think that it is fair to say that it would be completely impossible for someone to appeal against a decision that has not yet been made.

Going further (and using your flawed maths), a slightly more accurate figure would be Table 3 C88 / Table 1a F103 = Initial decisions overturned to date / Outcomes of claims where functional assessment has been completed to date = 7.5%, a figure around 1.7 times larger than your 4.5%.

Let's take this a step further, Table 3 F88 shows that more than 1.5 times the total of completed appeals were still awaiting hearings at the time of the report. As 37% of all appeals were upheld Table 3 C88 / Table 3 D88 = Initial decision overturned / Any outcome = 37% (as also shown in Table 3 I88) this would suggest that we can expect around 37% of those people awaiting a tribunal to have their decision overturned at appeal.

Should we extrapolate the 37% figure (which has been rounded down to exclude decimal places) to the number awaiting an appeal (bearing in mind that these people are actually included in the "Any outcome" Table 1a F103 figure and add that to the "initial decision overturned" Table 3 C88 then the figure in that box rises to 275.9.

Just to eliminate any doubt, my working out of this figure is 37% of 452.6 (Table 3 F88) is 167.5 (452.6/100 = 4.526 * 37 = 167.5 rounded to 1 decimal place). 167.5 (37% of Table 3 F88) + 108.4 (Table 3 C88) = 275.9.

Using your formula (which everyone including the compiler disagrees with - see Table 3 J88) with these revised figures we suddenly have a rise to 19.2% (rounded to one decimal place).

Again to eliminate any doubt, here is how I came to this figure. Table 3 C88 (+ 37% of Table 3 F88) / Table 1a F88 = initial decision overturned + 37% of Status of Fit for Work decisions where there is no completed appeals information at this date / Outcomes of claims where functional assessment has been completed = 19.2%.

This figure which is more than 4 times your figure is reached by using the correct cells and admittedly some extrapolation however even without the extrapolation and ignoring the massive number of people awaiting appeal results, the figure is still 7.5% (using your system).

Above all else I want to stress again the figure in Table 3 J88 which is "Percentage of heard appeals - Outcomes of appeals heard on Fit for Work decisions in the initial functional assessment - initial decision overturned" is 37%.

Just to spell this out for you, the person who compiled the report has not tried to calculate figures by carrying out complicated equations in order to fit an agenda, or to suit a pattern he or she was looking for. This person has stated that at the date of the report (more than 12 months ago) 37% of ALL initial fit for work decisions were overturned on appeal. As I pointed out in my previous post, this does not include appeals against "fit for work" decisions on re-assessment, appeals to be moved from WRAG to SG and any decisions changed at the reconsideration stage.

Let's also have a look at your claim that:

Fridge3 wrote: »

Your 31% and 39% do not relate to the post you quoted.

For the avoidance of doubt I will reproduce the full text. This can be found in the pdf at http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/workingage/esa_wca/esa_wca_jan2013.pdf on page 9 (which is actually the 13th page of the document). The complete text reads:

2.5.4. Initial outcomes adjusted following appeal – Tables 3 and 4

The statistics on initial outcome can be adjusted to reflect the results of appeals. To date, 39 per cent of all Fit For Work decisions have been appealed against. These results are only for cases where the assessments process has been completed, and therefore exclude all claims closed before assessment and those still in progress. The following results are for cohorts based on the date claims were started.

Table 3 in the accompanying tables on appeal rulings relating to claims starting from September to November 2011 shows:

• 69 per cent of initial Fit For Work decisions appealed against were upheld after challenge; and
• 31 per cent of initial Fit For Work decisions appealed against were overturned after challenge.

Unless I am reading this wrongly, the above quote states that "39 per cent of all Fit For Work decisions have been appealed against" and that "31 per cent of initial Fit For Work decisions appealed against were overturned after challenge". I think that you will find that the 39% and 31% figures I quoted do relate to the post I quoted.

schrodie

Only one brief appearance so far from the Atos PR Rep/Fridge3. It seems the MSE sponsored Atos propaganda machine is grinding to a halt!!

isolation

Could the ATOS rep explain why ATOS made 3 reports in 13 months for my partner, all which were fallacies and eventually withdrawn as being not fit for purpose but were still relied upon by the buffoons at the DWP.

The tribunal judge asked a single health-related question today before having her claim being reversed and giving a successful outcome. Excellent news for her that someone believes her at last but it is still disgusting that both ATOS and the DWP put her through absolute hell for the last year with successive false reports and a mountain of procedural errors and provable lies.
http://wp.me/p2JYS9-6F


Dee ('a disgruntled family member with a vested interest' (thanks fridge3))

beanielou

Great outcome at last isolation.
Im just sad it took so long for a positive outcome.

JS477

schrodie wrote: »

Only one brief appearance so far from the Atos PR Rep/Fridge3. It seems the MSE sponsored Atos propaganda machine is grinding to a halt!!

It would be interesting to see how much extra information this MSE sponsored Rep has given us that we couldn't have found out for ourselves from Atos's own website or the many people who know far more than this joker does about the system.

At least when he goes he'll take Fridge3 with him!!

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

Atos_Healthcare_company_representative wrote: »

Hi vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

It is possible for the Tribunal Service to request an assessment, in which case there would not be another ESA50 issued. If you contact us using the address in our profile we can look into your particular circumstances.

I think if the tribunal service requested an assessment i would have been informed i think.Why would they request an assessment if one has already been done?Even if they did request one,after 7/8 month a ESA50 would need to be filled because a lot can change in that time,and how can atos decide to do a face to face when they have no information to decide i have a home visit/or esa wrag/or esa support.You need an esa50 to decide.If they are saying a new assessment is needed,why is that?is it because the original assessment was not fit for purpose?

JS477

Before you go Atos Rep.

Does the "doctor" or "HCP" read the claimants ESA50 prior to the WCA?

nixe

are atos allowed to talk about some ones sex life?
a friend was interegated on this at her assessment.
are some things not private is she not allowed one cause she is disabled.

Olive_Oyl

JS477 wrote: »

Before you go Atos Rep.

Does the "doctor" or "HCP" read the claimants ESA50 prior to the WCA?

And can they carry out an assesment without an ESA50 ?

halight

isolation wrote: »

Could the ATOS rep explain why ATOS made 3 reports in 13 months for my partner, all which were fallacies and eventually withdrawn as being not fit for purpose but were still relied upon by the buffoons at the DWP.

The tribunal judge asked a single health-related question today before having her claim being reversed and giving a successful outcome. Excellent news for her that someone believes her at last but it is still disgusting that both ATOS and the DWP put her through absolute hell for the last year with successive false reports and a mountain of procedural errors and provable lies.
http://wp.me/p2JYS9-6F


Dee ('a disgruntled family member with a vested interest' (thanks fridge3))
http://dwpnegligence.wordpress.com

Glad You are now moving the right way now.

I'm juast worried that this might not be the end of the nightmere for you,
Will she still have to go for other ATOS medicals as time goes on?
If so this is were all the worry could start all over again for the both of you. And of course all that extra stress on you both will have a large impact on your health as well as hers.