dead within TWO WEEKS

Originally Posted by alanbjames

This is part of the reason ATOS has lost the contract. At one point 73% of decisions made by ATOS which were appealed got changed.

Do you have a link for that, please?

All I can find is a figure of 40%.

[Chrysalis]

Both parties are to blame here, whilst the tories are going full throttle with benefit cuts, the one statistic that stands out is they allowing more people into the support group in the 5 years between 2010 and 2015 is a pretty big increase in people in the support group.

Given Labour introduced ESA and have never said they will do something to allow more people onto it, they are like a lion without teeth.

IDS has also claimed and still does I think there is no targets to find a specific amount of people fit for work.

My view is they need to do something like this.

Remove the WRAG group. (work related activity group), as a seperate part of ESA. So ESA claimants are only claiming for the support group, loosen up the criteria for the support group, e.g. pretending people have a wheelchair when they dont, and especially when a medical professional has told them to not use a wheelchair is just not on, but they do this.
If someone claims for JSA and is told they too ill to work, they then should be put in the WRAG group and make that an element of JSA, meaning there is no people who are not ill enough for ESA but also not fit enough for JSA.

Reduce hours for the work programme so they only add up to the amount of hours needed to earn JSA money at the min wage,

Dont put people on the work programme who are already doing their own work training/apprenticeship or voluntary work.

I think the most important thing is the NHS needs to work with the DWP, there is people who have got nowhere with the NHS in regards to treatment or a diagnosis and are left on ESA for years as a result. These 2 departments dont work together. The NHS even charges the DWP for evidence it sends.

---------- Post added at 19:27 ---------- Previous post was at 19:20 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Do you have a link for that, please?

All I can find is a figure of 40%.

on panaroma a guy even said he was winning over 80% of cases.

I dont know the exact figures now (did before), but 40% does seem a low number I am pretty sure it was well over half of decisions been overturned.

The DWP then asked ATOS to do higher quality reports to help them win more appeals and that was the start of the ATOS and DWP falling out with each other. ATOS have now no longer got the contract and maximus has took over.

[nomadking]

One thing that would help is to stop people peddling myths.
Official WCA guidance on Wheelchair use and other aids and appliances.

Where an Aid or appliance has not been prescribed or advised
The DM must consider all the circumstances in order to determine whether it would be reasonable to assess the claimant as using an aid or appliance that has not been prescribed or that they have not been advised to use.
Factors include whether:
The claimant possesses the aid or appliance
The claimant was given specific medical advice about managing their condition, and it is reasonable for them to continue following that advice The claimant would be advised to use an aid or appliance if they raised it with the appropriate authority such as a GP or occupational therapist (advice may only be given on request). Note: It is recognised that HCPs offering advice as part of the WCA process do not necessarily have specialised knowledge of aids/appliances or of their prescription. The expectation is that HCPs will make a judgement that is based on his/her medical and functional training and awareness.
It is medically reasonable for the claimant to use an aid or appliance
...
An aid or appliance is widely available (again, common sense should prevail and HCP’s advice should be confined to devices that are recognised and in common use by those with similar disabilities. The HCP will, of course, have no knowledge of actual availability of aids or appliances within the claimant’s local area at any given time so will be unable to consider this when offering advice. )
An aid or appliance is affordable in the claimant’s circumstances (people are not routinely required to buy equipment where it can be prescribed.) Note: HCPs will not be aware of the claimant’s financial situation and are not asked to explore this area. The DM has to consider this aspect of the case but the HCP is not expected to comment here.
The claimant is able to use and store the aid or appliance
The claimant is unable to use an aid or appliance due to their physical or mental health condition (for example they are unable to use a walking stick or manual wheelchair due to a cardiac, respiratory, upper body or mental health condition).

That applies to ALL aids. Eg If you ask your GP about a wheelchair and the GP says no, then that is the end of it.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by nomadking

One thing that would help is to stop people peddling myths.
Official WCA guidance on Wheelchair use and other aids and appliances.
That applies to ALL aids. Eg If you ask your GP about a wheelchair and the GP says no, then that is the end of it.

and what if the patient wants a second opinion ? GP's make mistakes .

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by nomadking

One thing that would help is to stop people peddling myths.
Official WCA guidance on Wheelchair use and other aids and appliances.
That applies to ALL aids. Eg If you ask your GP about a wheelchair and the GP says no, then that is the end of it.

if only they followed those guidelines. Before you accuse me of peddling myths I am aware of those guidelines, and they have had to be used in so many appeals I have lost count, countless assessments people are been assumed to have a wheelchair even when they tell the assessor they have been told not to use one.

Then we have the situation where people have not been told to not use a wheelchair but also havent been told to use one and as such dont have one. The only time someone should be assessed in a wheelchair is if they actually have a wheelchair to use as specifically directed by a doctor.