Need help from any medical /legal experts regarding ESA fraud

steveactual

sangie595 wrote: »

I think that you may have missed an essential point here. It isn't regardless of your capability for work. Even if you were to be able to show that the report was incorrect, that doesn't mean you will get the benefit. Your consultant doesn't choose who is fit to work and who isn't. It isn't their decision. I very much doubt that some osteoarthritis that leaves you fit enough to use public transport is going to be assessed as "incapable of work". Assuming that you have to depend on NHS waiting lists, it could take several months to get to surgery if you started today. During which time it is entirely possible that you will be deemed fit for work and end up having to deal with benefits as such. Far better to stay to address your medical position as well- not least because you will presumably wish to get back to work and off benefits anyway.

You are correct, but even if I am ultimately declared fit for work, I am determined to pursue a case of fraud against the HCP for lying about my condition on a medical document.

steveactual

nannytone wrote: »

' fraud at a high level' ? you really need to get a grip and is a bit of perspective here.

yes, it does seem that you have had poor service regarding the ESA assessment, but calling it fraud is more than a little ridiculous.
you have every right to, and should complain, but to talk of legal action is just plain silly.

you are not inderstandin what 'repeatedly mobilise' means.
it isn't just about walking. they will look at your ability to use a manual wheelchair and if your only health issue is 1 bad hip then they would probably deem you able to mobilise using a manual wheelchair and so you would gain NO points for this section

Perspective? You might think its ok for a Registered Nurse to lie repeatedly on a medical document but I do not. Your insistence on defending this sort of activity is honestly baffling.


You are also misunderstanding the condition. You understand that a wheelchair is exactly that don't you? A chair? I am unable to sit in any sort of chair for 30 minutes without severe discomfort.

nannytone_2

fraud

noun
wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.
"he was convicted of fraud"

nannytone_2

steveactual wrote: »

Perspective? You might think its ok for a Registered Nurse to lie repeatedly on a medical document but I do not. Your insistence on defending this sort of activity is honestly baffling.


You are also misunderstanding the condition. You understand that a wheelchair is exactly that don't you? A chair? I am unable to sit in any sort of chair for 30 minutes without severe discomfort.

no one is doubting the poor quality of the WCA.
it is a tick box exercise that has many flaws and goes wrong far too often.

i have had a WCA myself, so know exactly what they are like.

regarding the hip replacement.
i am sorry to say that i am in agreement with others.
there is no age limit, and it will be replaced when it is deemed necessary.
the son of a friend had his first hip replacement at the age of 15

LKRDN_Morgan

I'm wondering what this nurse would gain from lying on the assessment? You do realise any allegation of wrongdoing is serious and could result in the nurse being struck off if found to be at fault during an NMC hearing?

Do you really think the nurse would risk his registration for this? As a nurse myself I can tell you nothing is worth risking that for.

What would be the purpose of him lying?

steveactual

nannytone wrote: »

fraud

noun
wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.
"he was convicted of fraud"

Yes but that's a very basic description of fraud. If you look at the Fraud Act 2006, we can see there are two important subsections;


Section 2, Fraud by Misrepresentation


Section 4 Fraud by Abuse of Position


You might see all this as an overreaction but I suspect that thinking is why they get away with this and they can continue their cowboy operation.

nannytone_2

LKRDN_Morgan wrote: »

I'm wondering what this nurse would gain from lying on the assessment? You do realise any allegation of wrongdoing is serious and could result in the nurse being struck off if found to be at fault during an NMC hearing?

Do you really think the nurse would risk his registration for this? As a nurse myself I can tell you nothing is worth risking that for.

What would be the purpose of him lying?

they undoubtedly so twist some things in the DWP's favour.

they ask 'chatty' questions such as ' what do you like to watch on the telly'
may seem innocent but the can say the claimant can sit long enough to watch a game of football, or that the claimant can concentrate long enough to watch a feature film.

so although the claimant may have said that they can't sit in one position or have poor concentration ...
the chatty question is counted as part of the WCA.

i am blind, but still say i 'watch' the telly although in practice, i listen to it.

it could have been written in the report that i could see well enough to watch the telly

steveactual

LKRDN_Morgan wrote: »

I'm wondering what this nurse would gain from lying on the assessment? You do realise any allegation of wrongdoing is serious and could result in the nurse being struck off if found to be at fault during an NMC hearing?

Do you really think the nurse would risk his registration for this? As a nurse myself I can tell you nothing is worth risking that for.

What would be the purpose of him lying?

I appreciate your response but you need to understand that this isn't a case of me making wild accusations. He examined a hip joint that is fused together with no cartilage, a joint that cannot even bend slightly, and then went and wrote in his report that it can 'bend fully'. He even tried to claim the joints flexion is the same as the right, which is ridiculously untrue. There can be no excuse or that level of incompetence.

TELLIT01

steveactual wrote: »

I personally don't think you should have been expected to work with that limiting condition but that's a different debate I guess!

You are absolutely correct to say that the debate on the rights and wrongs of ESA are another debate. The simple fact is that ESA assessments are about seeing what you are capable of doing, not what you can't do.
Disability is no absolute bar to working, neither should it be. A good friend of mine had a life limiting illness but still managed to work until about 18 months before his death. He had no desire to sit on his **** and expect the State, and therefore other people, to support him,

sangie595

TELLIT01 wrote: »

You are absolutely correct to say that the debate on the rights and wrongs of ESA are another debate. The simple fact is that ESA assessments are about seeing what you are capable of doing, not what you can't do.
Disability is no absolute bar to working, neither should it be. A good friend of mine had a life limiting illness but still managed to work until about 18 months before his death. He had no desire to sit on his **** and expect the State, and therefore other people, to support him,

Yes, I should be clear that the OP has misinterpreted what I said. Nobody forced me to work. And it never occurred to me to give up work and claim benefits. That is why I do not claim PIP- I don't believe that I need it. When I grew up, only the most extreme cases claimed benefits - going out to work was the norm. I see no reason why having a disability means I cannot work. Neither does my employer.