We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Atos, absolutely sick!
Comments
-
As much as I hate to agree with andyandflo (or whatever he is calling himself this week!), he is right - many IB claimants were left for years without review. There needs to be some middle ground, as the current system is at the other end of the scale.
If you satisfied Section 10 of The Social Security (Incapacity for Work) (General) Regulations 1995 then maybe otherwise you were reassessed after certain periods of time.
Also I never heard of anyone getting IB without having to fill out an IB50!0 -
I do agree with testing though. And ESA does test. Which is a good point about it. Unfortunately, these tests are not being done fairly, honestly or accurately. The WCA and the descriptors are bonkers hence why I said it's not fit for purpose.
IB was a different kettle of fish altogether. Some people could go for 20 years without being tested, others were called up regularly.
As I said, I do believe in testing for illness or everyone could go off on the sick, but the way it is at the moment is atrocious.4 Stones and 0 pounds or 25.4kg lighter :j0 -
speedyturtle wrote: »
If i had a choice than i would certainly not choose ESA as i can see the pain and suffering people are going through. I am not disabled and it might be very easy for someone like me or you to say ohh they making it up or they can work but there is a huge difference between picking an empty box and picking up boxes for 8 hours straight.
P.S. if anyone thinks that the current system is of ESA is working than i just hope and pray that you never need any kind of help ever in your life cause that would be the time you will open your eyes but by that time it would be too late.
The current system does work, my husband took ill just over four years ago and he has been on ESA (support group) since then without problems (apart from a small teething problem in the begining but that was soon sorrted out) and I was on IB for over 20 years and I was transfered to ESA late last year without any problem at all, I was put straight into the support group without a face to face medical.
The main problem people have is that they dont have medical evidence to back up their claim, if they did they wouldnt have so many problems.
There are problems with the appeals service currently mostly caused by people appealing to go into the support group when thay are fully aware that they dont fulfil the criteria for that group (the number of appeals for this must have shot up when the 365 day rule came in based on this and other sites I read), their needs to be sanctions available to prevent this waste of time and money then people who are rightfully appealing wont have to wait so long for their appeals to be heard.0 -
speedyturtle wrote: »
The current system does work, my husband took ill just over four years ago and he has been on ESA (support group) since then without problems (apart from a small teething problem in the begining but that was soon sorrted out) and I was on IB for over 20 years and I was transfered to ESA late last year without any problem at all, I was put straight into the support group without a face to face medical.
The main problem people have is that they dont have medical evidence to back up their claim, if they did they wouldnt have so many problems.
There are problems with the appeals service currently mostly caused by people appealing to go into the support group when thay are fully aware that they dont fulfil the criteria for that group (the number of appeals for this must have shot up when the 365 day rule came in based on this and other sites I read), their needs to be sanctions available to prevent this waste of time and money then people who are rightfully appealing wont have to wait so long for their appeals to be heard.
Correction, the system worked for you. There are many others who fit the criteria who are found fit for work, it's been well documented. Unless you've seen the people they've lied about, then you don't know the whole story. TBH I didn't believe it until it happened to the dd. Then I started reading into it more. There are too many discrepancies for my liking.
Then there's the lies....4 Stones and 0 pounds or 25.4kg lighter :j0 -
Correction, the system worked for you. There are many others who fit the criteria who are found fit for work, it's been well documented. Unless you've seen the people they've lied about, then you don't know the whole story. TBH I didn't believe it until it happened to the dd. Then I started reading into it more. There are too many discrepancies for my liking.
Then there's the lies....
Ive seen it work for other people too, most people who fail the WCA do so because they have not prepared for it by making sure that they have the evidence to back up their claims.
People need to take responsibility for their own lives, the form is very simple and it asks you to enclose proof to support your claim and its very easy to get this proof if you have a valid ESA claim, people who cant provide this proof deserve to fail to get ESA.
I have been to several WCA's btw as support to the claimant, in every case the result was correct including the one person who failed it.0 -
Ive seen it work for other people too, most people who fail the WCA do so because they have not prepared for it by making sure that they have the evidence to back up their claims.
People need to take responsibility for their own lives, the form is very simple and it asks you to enclose proof to support your claim and its very easy to get this proof if you have a valid ESA claim, people who cant provide this proof deserve to fail to get ESA.
I have been to several WCA's btw as support to the claimant, in every case the result was correct including the one person who failed it.
Totally agree with you. Although in my case I have done the entire opposite. As you say medical evidence should be easy to obtain if you are a genuine claimant.
I object strongly to having to do the work for ATOS/DWP. ATOS get paid for assessing people - so I make them work for it! Yes I have all of the required evidence and more besides + reports from my psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker and the lovely OT from Social Services not forgetting the 8 other consultants I see and of course the Dementia clinic.
I expect them to ask for the evidencen as it is not for me to do their job for them, and/or award me ESA (SG) based entirely on the ESA50.
Most likely I have forced them to call me for a F2F again. The evidence, like last time, I hand in at the Tribunal.
It's just my little bit of fun with them - make them work and cost them money.0 -
oh please Andy correct your post, that makes it look as if I said that.
Trust me, I've been through it with someone too, who had over whelming evidence. And was turned down flat. Several lies were told about them. Anyone who knew the applicant wouldn't have recognised her from the report that was written, it was like it was about someone completely different.
So are you of the belief that all these people are lying about their experiences with ATOS? You can't accept that ATOS get it wrong? Dream land. You just need to see the posts on here and the posts on other forums to see that it's not working for a lot of people. Just because it worked for you doesn't mean it's working.4 Stones and 0 pounds or 25.4kg lighter :j0 -
Yup, the 'dementia' bit I get. What I don't get is your constant insistence in rejoining here under many new nicks and spreading paranoia. Is your life so shallow that you must spread panic amongst those that worry about losing benefits? Get a conscience will you.
Totally agree with you. Although in my case I have done the entire opposite. As you say medical evidence should be easy to obtain if you are a genuine claimant.
I object strongly to having to do the work for ATOS/DWP. ATOS get paid for assessing people - so I make them work for it! Yes I have all of the required evidence and more besides + reports from my psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker and the lovely OT from Social Services not forgetting the 8 other consultants I see and of course the Dementia clinic.
I expect them to ask for the evidencen as it is not for me to do their job for them, and/or award me ESA (SG) based entirely on the ESA50.
Most likely I have forced them to call me for a F2F again. The evidence, like last time, I hand in at the Tribunal.
It's just my little bit of fun with them - make them work and cost them money.0 -
Atos did this to me i rang up and was told it was a error and to ignore it.
I have a thread on there lies.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3940545Jan Wins: .0 -
Ive seen it work for other people too, most people who fail the WCA do so because they have not prepared for it by making sure that they have the evidence to back up their claims.
People need to take responsibility for their own lives, the form is very simple and it asks you to enclose proof to support your claim and its very easy to get this proof if you have a valid ESA claim, people who cant provide this proof deserve to fail to get ESA.
On the 'people need to take responsibility for their own lives' front - this is all very well in practice but many people struggling on a day-to-day basis find it hard to do this and many don't know what to expect at an assessment as it is not made clear to them.
On the remainder, I am quite gobsmacked by your judgemental post. Could you please take a look at my partner's claim and state what she did wrong in order to be refused benefits ?
We took a large file of evidence to the assessment and tried to show the assessor various evidence at relevant points and he said that it was not necessary and did not look at them.
She explained her illness and daily living in detail - in most cases, exactly the opposite was written in the assessment (http://wp.me/p2JYS9-c) - This took 7 months until the assessment was declared not fit for purpose and her benefits restored.
On the evidence front - her specialist team provided a comprehensive summary of not only her condition but on how it affects her life. The Decision Maker agreed with the ATOS report that the condition as stated in her specialist report was exaggerated and that her condition does not cause significant impairment (http://dwpnegligence.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/dla-claim-atosed-again/) (http://dwpnegligence.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/dla-appeal-sent-to-hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/)- again this report was withdrawn although we are still awaiting a tribunal. She is due to have her bowels, colon and rectum removed in 2 weeks.
Many of the letters and assessments are on my weblog if you wish not to believe me.
I would be grateful if you could let me know what we did wrong and hopefully it will help others in future.
Thanks,
Dee0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards