Ask Atos Healthcare disability assessment questions

schrodie

Question for the MSE Sponsored Atos Rep.

Mark Hoban in answer to this question:-

"To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many claimants who underwent a computerised assessment conducted by Atos and were declared fit for work died within six months of their assessment?"

said

"Atos do not undertake computerised assessments."

Source Column 889W Here

So what has happened to LiMA (Logic Integrated Medical Assessment) software for use by Atos doctors and Atos nurses to carry out "medical" assessments on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions?


Secondly

Do Atos "doctors" and "nurses" have to introduce themselves at the beginning of the processing procedure? I understand they may wear name badges but my question is do they verbally have to introduce themselves to the person they are processing?


If you can't answer the first part can you please answer the second part?

Atos_Healthcare_representative

isolation wrote: »

Could you please clarify this as this was exactly the opposite advice to that I was given and exactly the opposite of what aided the process.

Complaining to the DWP about "the advice provided to them" seemed to do absolutely nothing as they say they rely on the ATOS assessment.

On the other hand, ATOS have their own complaints procedure which, as far as I am aware can only be initiated by a 'customer'. It is this which deals with the issue of disputes on the advice provided to the DWP (as opposed to 'what the dwp do with this advice').

Furthermore, the Independent Case Examiner (for the DWP) will not entertain complaints made about ATOS assessments as ATOS have their own complaints procedure.

You seem to be giving the opposite advice to that provided by the DWP, ICE and advice workers in this area.

Dee
http://dwnegligence.wordpress.com

Hi isolation

we are happy to investigate issues of dissatisfaction about our service, such as any concerns about appointment arrangements or the interactions with our staff. We also investigate concerns about factual inaccuracies on a medical report; however, if the dispute relates to “advice” provided to the DWP, which concerns medical opinion on a person’s functional capacity, this should be dealt with through the DWP reconsideration process or by making an appeal.

isolation

Atos_Healthcare_company_representative wrote: »

Hi isolation

we are happy to investigate issues of dissatisfaction about our service, such as any concerns about appointment arrangements or the interactions with our staff. We also investigate concerns about factual inaccuracies on a medical report; however, if the dispute relates to “advice” provided to the DWP, which concerns medical opinion on a person’s functional capacity, this should be dealt with through the DWP reconsideration process or by making an appeal.

Thanks for the clarification. I do strongly disagree with the advice you have given however.

We initially did as you suggested and provided a lot of evidence to show that the HCPs fairy tale was incorrect as to the *advice* to the decision maker in 3 different assessments. The decision maker did not take this into consideration at all. The DWP complaint procedure simply referred this back to the ATOS reports.

After many weeks of pursuing this, my MP and a legal advisor recommended the ATOS complaints procedure. It was the ATOS complaints procedure which declared the assessments to be declared not fit for purpose.
Complaining to the DWP meant months of wasted time.
Complaining to the DWP meant that the complaint procedure was refused at the Independent Case Examiner stage as as I have said before, they will not entertain complaints about advice given by ATOS.

I really cannot understand why you are suggesting that people follow this route when you own complaints procedure deals with incorrect advice given by your HCPs and not the DWP nor the Independent Case Examiner.

Even without anecdotal evidence that your complaints procedure clearly *does* deal with incorrect *advice* given, does it not stand to reason that if an ATOS HCP gives incorrect advice then it is a complaint should be made to ATOS and not the DWP who have nothing to do with the advice received.

Dee
http://dwpnegligence.wordpress.com

schrodie

Question for the MSE Sponsored Atos Rep.

Mark Hoban in answer to this question:-

"To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many claimants who underwent a computerised assessment conducted by Atos and were declared fit for work died within six months of their assessment?"

said

"Atos do not undertake computerised assessments."

Source Column 889W Here

So what has happened to LiMA (Logic Integrated Medical Assessment) software for use by Atos doctors and Atos nurses to carry out "medical" assessments on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions?


Secondly

Do Atos "doctors" and "nurses" have to introduce themselves at the beginning of the processing procedure? I understand they may wear name badges but my question is do they verbally have to introduce themselves to the person they are processing?


If you can't answer the first part can you please answer the second part?

damo24

Well after 183 days of what can only be described as absolute hell, the tribunal decided that I should be placed in the support group and am not to be re-assessed for at least 12 months. They made this decision before the tribunal so I was in the actual room for less than a minute (just to pick up their written statement).

Despite the DWP deciding I was fit for work based on the Atos so-called medical report, the tribunal stated: "The Tribunal reached a different conclusion, having regard to mental factors, on substantially the same facts".

Thank you so much to everyone on here for their support, I guess it's now time to start the formal complaints. Dee (Isolation), I know that you have been through all of this so would you be so kind as to recommend the best way to make a complaint to Atos about the HCP. I think that I have found the GMC complaints procedure at http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/good_medical_practice/probity_reports_and_cvs.asp and I think that it is fair to say that the HCP failed on points 63 and 65.

isolation

damo24 wrote: »

Well after 183 days of what can only be described as absolute hell, ...

Thank you so much to everyone on here for their support, I guess it's now time to start the formal complaints. Dee (Isolation), I know that you have been through all of this so would you be so kind as to ....

Firstly, well done... not only for being successful at your tribunal but for persevering. Many simply have to give up when faced with false assessments from ATOS.

Perhaps the ATOS rep could comment as to whether this advice is correct ?

I wouldn't get your hopes up too much - whilst you are probably upset, angry at your injust treatment, it will probably be very difficult to get the outcome you desire.

Personally I would:-
1. Complain to ATOS CR, escalate this when you are unhappy to their second tier, escalate this when you are unhappy to their Independent tier ensuring you supply as much evidence as possible. ATOS will have no interest in resolving your complaint as hcps who give advice to deny benefits are good for business.

2. If you feel that the DWP acted inappropriately, complaint to the Decision Maker's department. When you are unhappy with the response, escalate this to Noel Shanahan (Director General), then scalate this to the Independent Case Examiner. (The DWP are often better at telling you the next stages of the complaints procedure than ATOS).

3. Complain to relevant 3rd parties, the GMC and your MP.

As I say, congratulations on persevering - by all means continue with the complaints as you probably do feel very aggrieved by the unfairness of the current system where false assessments by ATOS and unjust decisions by the DWP are common. Continue with the processes but also try to get on with your life too.

Best wishes,
Dee
http://dwpnegligence.wordpress.com

damo24

isolation wrote: »

Firstly, well done... not only for being successful at your tribunal but for persevering. Many simply have to give up when faced with false assessments from ATOS.

Perhaps the ATOS rep could comment as to whether this advice is correct ?

I wouldn't get your hopes up too much - whilst you are probably upset, angry at your injust treatment, it will probably be very difficult to get the outcome you desire.

Personally I would:-
1. Complain to ATOS CR, escalate this when you are unhappy to their second tier, escalate this when you are unhappy to their Independent tier ensuring you supply as much evidence as possible. ATOS will have no interest in resolving your complaint as hcps who give advice to deny benefits are good for business.

2. If you feel that the DWP acted inappropriately, complaint to the Decision Maker's department. When you are unhappy with the response, escalate this to Noel Shanahan (Director General), then scalate this to the Independent Case Examiner. (The DWP are often better at telling you the next stages of the complaints procedure than ATOS).

3. Complain to relevant 3rd parties, the GMC and your MP.

As I say, congratulations on persevering - by all means continue with the complaints as you probably do feel very aggrieved by the unfairness of the current system where false assessments by ATOS and unjust decisions by the DWP are common. Continue with the processes but also try to get on with your life too.

Best wishes,
Dee
http://dwpnegligence.wordpress.com

Thanks Dee. My main aim right now is to concentrate on trying to stabilise my condition enough to allow me to be able to get back to work and although I am not going to spend all of my time making complaints I am certainly going to try and get some answers as to why I suffered for so long.

Thanks again.

Muttleythefrog

damo24 wrote: »

Well after 183 days of what can only be described as absolute hell, the tribunal decided that I should be placed in the support group and am not to be re-assessed for at least 12 months. They made this decision before the tribunal so I was in the actual room for less than a minute (just to pick up their written statement).

Despite the DWP deciding I was fit for work based on the Atos so-called medical report, the tribunal stated: "The Tribunal reached a different conclusion, having regard to mental factors, on substantially the same facts".

Thank you so much to everyone on here for their support, I guess it's now time to start the formal complaints. Dee (Isolation), I know that you have been through all of this so would you be so kind as to recommend the best way to make a complaint to Atos about the HCP. I think that I have found the GMC complaints procedure at http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/good_medical_practice/probity_reports_and_cvs.asp and I think that it is fair to say that the HCP failed on points 63 and 65.

This is incredibly damning of ATOS/DWP.

Whilst it is sound advice for people to go to tribunal to present primary evidence to increase their chances of success it seems many tribunals aren't wasting everyone's time. Having read the paper based evidence they tribunal were obviously so convinced of the material facts and therefore decision to be taken that presented with opportunity to interview the primary source they felt it was a waste of time. And like in many cases, reaching a very different determination to that of DWP/ATOS.. not merely a few points here or there... but often placing people straight into support group following being found fit for work.

Pleased this horror has ended at least for now. Unfortunately the DWP don't have to accept the recommendation regarding timescale for reassessment but I'd strongly suggest when you do get another one that you include the tribunal decision details as evidence.

Good luck with complaint. Refer above for advice on that.

Muttleythefrog

isolation wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification. I do strongly disagree with the advice you have given however.

We initially did as you suggested and provided a lot of evidence to show that the HCPs fairy tale was incorrect as to the *advice* to the decision maker in 3 different assessments. The decision maker did not take this into consideration at all. The DWP complaint procedure simply referred this back to the ATOS reports.

After many weeks of pursuing this, my MP and a legal advisor recommended the ATOS complaints procedure. It was the ATOS complaints procedure which declared the assessments to be declared not fit for purpose.
Complaining to the DWP meant months of wasted time.
Complaining to the DWP meant that the complaint procedure was refused at the Independent Case Examiner stage as as I have said before, they will not entertain complaints about advice given by ATOS.

I really cannot understand why you are suggesting that people follow this route when you own complaints procedure deals with incorrect advice given by your HCPs and not the DWP nor the Independent Case Examiner.

Even without anecdotal evidence that your complaints procedure clearly *does* deal with incorrect *advice* given, does it not stand to reason that if an ATOS HCP gives incorrect advice then it is a complaint should be made to ATOS and not the DWP who have nothing to do with the advice received.

Dee
http://dwpnegligence.wordpress.com

MSE admin should note that the rep advertised the lack of complaints to them as indication of their assessment success. However as the rep also has demonstrated on this thread, he or she (or they) will put people off complaining to them. It's a case of massaging the figures for a PR presentation.

The ATOS rep has repeatedly through this thread advised claimants (customers) to do things which clearly or likely would not be the best or more logical route to getting justice or correct decisions regarding their benefit entitlements.

I hope MSE really are taking note.

Muttleythefrog

Atos_Healthcare_company_representative wrote: »

Hi Muttleythefrog

Queries around compensation payments aren’t something that I can answer.

Regarding complaining, if someone disagrees with the advice provided to the DWP about how they are affected by their medical condition it is appropriate to pursue this with the DWP office handling their claim. The DWP decide entitlement to benefit based on all available evidence; the report from the health care professional is one piece of evidence.

The DWP (as part of their reconsideration process) and HM Courts and Tribunal Service (when deciding an appeal), will consider all evidence afresh to determine a claim.

Fortunately I already know the answer to the question, I simply wanted to see if you were prepared to state such for the people here to give context. Let's just say that complaints can take a long long time to be resolved and awards of any monetary value probably would cover the postage costs involved in the affair and little else. In other words it's not a particular useful or helpful route for claimants it would seem... even if successful.

Moving on however as at least one other person suggests, I am not sure this is the best advice you go on to give. The best route, as early intervention, is surely to engage ATOS HC in relation to the advice given. It is highly likely that the evidence available to DWP and the ATOS HCP who provides the advice is effectively the same... and therefore (poor) medical advice from a medical expert is unlikely to be challenged by a DWP DM. (I can only imagine where the DWP DM is presented with compelling new information would they feel cause to question the ATOS HCP advice unless that advice is so obviously wide of the mark that the HCP should be assumed to have had a very bad day at the office). The best course of action at early intervention would strike me to be to target the advice given in the hope that it can be corrected such that appropriate ATOS HCP advice is given to the DWP so that they can make their decision or reconsideration as appropriate. What you seem to be recommending is that claimants target the DWP to complain about poor advice from HCPs at ATOS HC. It is no wonder you get few complaints as you claim.

Sorry, but you are giving PR responses. You are not in the slightest bit interested in the wellbeing of claimants (customers) or the level of service they get. What you need to understand is that for many, if not most, claimants of ESA it is a stressful process or a difficult process and as such they're quite possibly going to struggle within the processes. I've never failed a WCA but I am permanently feeling the heat of being on ESA because I know at any time a bad assessment (i.e. an equally inaccurate one to the rest but with a different outcome) could be made and then I am looking at going into serious decline. If I had confidence in the system then such stresses would be significantly lower. What I'm conscious of when advising claimants is that a) they may not have very good cognition, b) they may struggle to do much at all, c) they're possibly poor at understanding technical processes, d) many can be easily fobbed off with bad advice or incorrect advice. Sometimes the most logical advice or even advice at all can be damaging to them (for example.. it's easy to sit here and advise someone to complain where they have good cause to and there is a process to follow.. however they may be barely able to get out of bed or feed themselves so what limited scope they have to do anything needs to be well targetted). I think on this thread you have demonstrated that you are prepared to use the fact that a, b, c and d are going to be possible to further your cause and not theirs. People do not forget that ATOS HC actively discouraged claimants from providing supporting medical evidence... I suspect that without state intervention in that matter people like you still would be doing it.