PIP - provider guidance

dori2o

satarical wrote: »

Personally I can't see how that can be the case. CAPITA are also involved in the PIP assessments and the LiMA software belongs to ATOS. Maybe CAPITA are paying ATOS to use it? Or maybe the assessment will be carried out along the lines of the DLA or IIDB assessments. You say your piece, then the doctor writes up his/her own opinion that has very little bearing on what you said - claimant - ' I am prescribed 150mg of Morphine daily for the pain' - ATOS doctor writes ' claimant takes low level pain relief medication!'

Thats what happened with my DLA claim. The 'Registered Nurse', who gave information to DWP on behalf of my problems came to several conclusions that would have ensured I would never want me to be 'cared' for by her for fear of my own life.

According to the Nurse unremitting pain is not a possibility with neuropathic pain, and I was taking 'MILD' analgesic based medication.

200mg MST
180mg+ Dihydrocodeine
Duloxetine 50mg
Naproxen 50mg

That is the 'mild' analgesic medication she was talking about.

The medical professional on the Tribunal couldn't believe what had been written and was happy to learn that I had reported the matter to the NMC.

dori2o

halight wrote: »

Do we know why they have dropped the "C" ?Are they now allowed to use a cleaner that has been trained in first aid now ?

I think it's quite right that they have dropped the 'C' considering it stood for 'Care'. There's no 'Care' at all displayed by ATOS or any of its minions.

rogerblack

dori2o wrote: »

I think it's quite right that they have dropped the 'C' considering it stood for 'Care'. There's no 'Care' at all displayed by ATOS or any of its minions.

All staff I have been in contact with at ATOS were polite, courteous, and apparently attempting to do their jobs in the best way they could.

The report generated was as good as you can reasonably expect with the limitations imposed.

The DWP and tribunals service personell I've been in contact with have been considerably less professional.

The problems are to a large degree at least systematic, and due to the contract and law.

Some HCPs can't really cope, due to the system imposed, and the limits. This would be the case with almost any system.

dori2o

rogerblack wrote: »

All staff I have been in contact with at ATOS were polite, courteous, and apparently attempting to do their jobs in the best way they could.

The report generated was as good as you can reasonably expect with the limitations imposed.

The DWP and tribunals service personell I've been in contact with have been considerably less professional.

The problems are to a large degree at least systematic, and due to the contract and law.

Some HCPs can't really cope, due to the system imposed, and the limits. This would be the case with almost any system.

The onoly dealing I have had with ATOS are through work, they are our OH advisers, and they have been fine, mainly because many of them are simply the Capita staff that were Tuped over to Atos, and so they have a long understanding with some staff.

However, I have experienced the WCA first had with my Dad, twice.

Both times the Dr's were quite rude.

One of them said if my Dad didn't squat, or kneel down as he had asked, he would have to report that my Dad refused to take part in that part of the assessment. The actual truth was my Dad couldn't physically do it, and still wouldn't be able to.

Both reports contained mistruths, such as my Dad signing a form and opening the door with his right hand. He's predominantly left handed.

Such as my dad being alone in the assessment room and taking off his coat and shoes (including laces) without any problem. I was in the room with him and had to help with his coat on both occassions and he took a shoe horn which I had to help him with to get his slip-on shoesback on, again on both occassions.

He said my dad had driven 14 miles and showed no signs of fatigue as per his ESA50. But the Dr was told thast I had driven as my Dad doesn't know the centre of Manchester very well so I drove.

They may only be minor things but they do affect the end result, as was confirmed by the tribunal.

I guess every assessment is different, but from the evidence seen all across the internet, IMO there are far more bad experiences than good.

rogerblack

dori2o wrote: »

I guess every assessment is different, but from the evidence seen all across the internet, IMO there are far more bad experiences than good.

The vast majority of people do not go and find a forum to report a good experience.

dori2o

rogerblack wrote: »

The vast majority of people do not go and find a forum to report a good experience.

It is a good point, but again, it does come back to personal experiences, and ours wasn't good, either time.

satarical

rogerblack wrote: »

The vast majority of people do not go and find a forum to report a good experience.

But given the number of posts on this and other forums since 2008 regarding the poor reporting by ATOS for ESA claims, there does appear to be something going wrong. The vast majority cite ridiculously contradictory opinions given by the assessor.

If we are to believe that what ATOS say is their intention to get things right, then even one poor report that goes to the DWP is one too many!

As for my own experiences, I can only say that I would refuse to be treated and cared for by any of the doctors & nurses that have assessed me for various benefits.

Just imagine it in an A&E department when a patient comes in with chest pains and has difficulty breathing only to be diagnosed as having a mild case of indigestion which has brought on a panic attack. Poor fella dies 10 hours later of heart failure. Not to worry, your widow can always appeal against the doctors opinion at a Tribunal.