Ask Atos Healthcare disability assessment questions

schrodie

Atos_Healthcare_representative wrote: »

Hi schrodie

I’m here to help people through the WCA process by answering questions they have about it. I can’t comment on things like this, but you can read the Atos Healthcare Press Statement.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Hopefully for atos the end is nigh and the misery for sick and disabled people and massive cost to the taxpayer is coming to and end.

Richie-from-the-Boro

Atos Healthcare Press Statement

"A ‘C’ grade report does not mean the assessment was wrong, and the recommendation given in a ‘C’ grade report may well be correct, but, for example, their reasoning for reaching that recommendation may lack the level of detail demanded by the DWP. Atos Healthcare does not make the decision on someone’s benefit entitlement - the reports produced by Atos are only a part of the process with DWP decision-makers making the final decision."

So there we have it - the assessment was not wrong you see, it was someone else, the DWP, the DM, the client - anyone but ATOS that leads to 42+% assessment outcomes being unfit for purpose.

As for 'badly prepared cases and poor due diligence', a large number of cases were never really prepared in the first place, and had poor or no due diligence, I'd say about almost exactly ..................... 42% had badly prepared cases and poor due diligence. Put another way the DM rubber stamps almost all of ATOS decisions and 42% of ATOS decisions were wrong in that first place.

That's to say 42% of appealed ATOS decisions were wrong in that first place..

We really gave no idea of how many decisions were wrong out of the total WCA's. If all 100% of those attending a WCA asked (1) for the assessment to be recorded, and all 100% of those attending a WCA (2) appealed a decision they felt was wrong, then we may begin to get at the truth, that very truth may begin lead to a change in both ATOS decision making and the DWP's decision maker's blind acceptance of the ATOS decision outcome.

We are all by now aware that a 'recording request' is available to any claimant on request and the claimant can if requested have a copy of that recoding, the excuse that its the claimants fault for not providing sufficient information is a red herring, we all read each day on this forum that evidence provided was not read or discussed by the HCP, we all read each day on this forum that the 'statement of reasons' when requested bears no resemblance whatsoever to what happened in the presence of the HCP. Evidence bought by the claimant should be read, and their conclusions must be evidence-based, a HCP can not conveniently fall back on the phrase “in my opinion” without anything to substantiate it, and in the event that there is a conflict between the opinion of the HCP and the supplied medical evidence the ATOS report should make reference to the evidence that has been considered and justification provided.

If all all 100% of those attending a WCA requested a recording and a copy - and all 100% of those attending a WCA unhappy with its outcome, requested the appeal they are entiled to, even the puppetmaster itself may be forced into delivering to its people that which they deserve .. .. .. equal access to their legal right to state support under the laws of the UK.

- 1.6 million claimants on IB transition
- 11,000 assessments every week
- GOV's own figures, up to 1,300 persons dying after being put into the WRAG
- 2,200 people die before their assessment was completed
- 7,100 people dying after being put into the support group

WHY ? - WHAT FOR ? this "ruthless" pressurising the sick and disabled into work, there are already :

- 2.5 million people unemployed
- on average, eight persons chasing every vacancy

isolation

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

<snip>
So there we have it - the assessment was not wrong you see, it was someone else, the DWP, the DM, the client - anyone but ATOS that leads to 42+% assessment outcomes being unfit for purpose.

An excellent comment. It is all too easy for ATOS to hide behind the 'we don't make the decisions' argument.
they produce the farcial reports on which decisions are made. ATOS can claim that they don't make the final decision, the DWP claim they made the decision based on the assessment report. No one is remotely accountable for their actions. Everyone's a winner.

... apart from the people who are the victims of this total lack of accountability, many of whom simply can't contest the decisions as they are incapable of doing so either through lack of knowledge of the system, lack of available assistance or inability due to their illness which ATOS claims they do not have.

Dee
http://dwpnegligence.wordpress.com

isolation

Dear MSE,

With reference to this thread...

Will the ATOS rep now lose his/her monopoly or contract on this thread as the official rep ? Will it be put out to tender ?

Dee
http://dwpegligence.wordpress.com

westerby1

A lot of Atos reports should start with "once upon a time"

Although I scored enough points to receive ESA my report was laughable.

"Neighbour in daily and pops" which I presume means my neighbour pops in daily, "used to go into town with friend but stopped because pain in neck" I assume they meant I stopped because of the pain in my neck, and not because my friend is a pain in the neck! "cat feeds unaided from sachet" I feed my cat food from a sachet and open the sachet unaided!?

An examination of my upper limbs concluded I had no problem with my lower limbs and I apparently changed sex half way through the assessment as "she" became "he":rotfl:

Simmouk_3

How long does it normally take from Medical Assessment to Decision ?
Had Mine on tues 25th June, after 3 cancelled appointments (By ATOS) and trying to cancel that appointment on the day. Also took over 6 months from return of form to initial appointment

JS477

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

Atos Healthcare Press Statement

"A ‘C’ grade report does not mean the assessment was wrong, and the recommendation given in a ‘C’ grade report may well be correct, but, for example, their reasoning for reaching that recommendation may lack the level of detail demanded by the DWP. Atos Healthcare does not make the decision on someone’s benefit entitlement - the reports produced by Atos are only a part of the process with DWP decision-makers making the final decision."

So there we have it - the assessment was not wrong you see, it was someone else, the DWP, the DM, the client - anyone but ATOS that leads to 42+% assessment outcomes being unfit for purpose.

As for 'badly prepared cases and poor due diligence', a large number of cases were never really prepared in the first place, and had poor or no due diligence, I'd say about almost exactly ..................... 42% had badly prepared cases and poor due diligence. Put another way the DM rubber stamps almost all of ATOS decisions and 42% of ATOS decisions were wrong in that first place.

A typical load of garbage from atos.

"Move along please there's nothing to see here' this has got nothing to do with us. We were only following orders and targets"

JS477

westerby1 wrote: »

A lot of Atos reports should start with "once upon a time"

Although I scored enough points to receive ESA my report was laughable.

"Neighbour in daily and pops" which I presume means my neighbour pops in daily, "used to go into town with friend but stopped because pain in neck" I assume they meant I stopped because of the pain in my neck, and not because my friend is a pain in the neck! "cat feeds unaided from sachet" I feed my cat food from a sachet and open the sachet unaided!?

An examination of my upper limbs concluded I had no problem with my lower limbs and I apparently changed sex half way through the assessment as "she" became "he":rotfl:

Maybe the LIMA computer system that atos use to carry out these assessments couldn't cope with the heat!!

Richie-from-the-Boro

LiMA

- done properly ~v~ done badly
- done with ~v~ done without speaking
- done hurriedly ~v~ done with all the time in the world
- done by a skilled practitioner ~v~ done by a monkey
- done by an ASDA 'till jockey' ~v~ done by an ATOS HCP

The outcome average refusals will be the same, its not a design fault, its a well designed fully effective working Logic Integrated Medical Assessment model regardless of who is at the keyboard. The primary design of LiMA, its training programme, line managers and statistical outcome characteristic is to deny 58% of its customers a fair hearing and a fair outcome, its your right, those 42% are entitled under UK laws to their rights. LiMA denied those 42% the equal treatment they are entitled to. If it was anything other than what I describe then the mixed average [in person & paper] of 42%+ appeals would not succeed and the 65%+ of represented appeals would not succeed. Its not an emotional opinion, but a mathematical truth. 5% ? possible 10% ? maybe just bad design..... but 42%+ - give me a break, its been hovering around 45% since it stated years and years ago and has never been input~improved but has been negatively outcome~adjusted.

In my opinion the assessor is virtually irrelevant in the process other than needing to put a 'human face' on the process, listening, smiling while diligently ticking each box will make no difference whatsoever, it might be a social nicety, but would not change the conclusion. Done by a skilled practitioner or done by a monkey the outcome is always going to be the same. Its predictive software, its capacity to anticipate an outcome, any outcome, at for example an adjusted 30% 20% 70% anything they choose can be achieved by simply changing the descriptor or the interpretation of a descriptor.

FTW

JS477 wrote: »

A typical load of garbage from atos.

"Move along please there's nothing to see here' this has got nothing to do with us. We were only following orders and targets"

Jawohl - ve are not to blame. Ve vere only doing our duty.