|
||||||||
Government hid reports on the deaths of benefit claimants from independent expert |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
Stop, just stop trying to defend this system. You don't know anything about it. Please don't say "but I work...." It's a crap argument, unless you have been on the end of it you should just stop defending it!
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,772
|
Quote:
What changes were made that "made them worse", that weren't suggested under Labour(ie Oct 2009) or by one of the independent reviews?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,218
|
Quote:
The thread is about ESA.
The government has secretly made major changes to guidance given to “fitness for work” benefits assessors that has put the lives of thousands of disabled claimants at risk… and then “lied” about what it had done. ( And this is how you do it though the back door ) Because the changes were carried out through updated guidance – rather than changes to legislation or regulations – DWP did not seek the approval of parliament for the alterations. |
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
How have the Tories made them better, have you been through the system, do you know how bad it is, have you not been keeping up with what has been happening in the last six years, did you not pay attention to the OP's post? In short another Tory "they must all be scroungers" type buries head in sand and tries to convince everyone black is white.
Why are people so reluctant to give specific examples of adverse changes? |
|
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 66
|
Quote:
What changes were made that "made them worse", that weren't suggested under Labour(ie Oct 2009) or by one of the independent reviews?
and all because as far as the tory government was concerned too many people were getting into the SG. |
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,772
|
Quote:
They've followed and implemented the suggestions of independent reviews where possible. What is wrong with that?
Why are people so reluctant to give specific examples of adverse changes? |
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
Well here is a good one on ESA . http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com...er-its-tracks/. DWP issued guidance that made suicides more likely, then ‘lied’ to cover its tracks
The government has secretly made major changes to guidance given to “fitness for work” benefits assessors that has put the lives of thousands of disabled claimants at risk… and then “lied” about what it had done. ( And this is how you do it though the back door ) Because the changes were carried out through updated guidance – rather than changes to legislation or regulations – DWP did not seek the approval of parliament for the alterations. |
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,087
|
Quote:
As I have pointed out you have to wait 6 months before submitting a fresh ESA claim. That restriction was also there for Incapacity benefit, so NOTHING NEW. All he had to do was submit an appeal and sick notes would be accepted;
Also, as of 30th March 2015, the six month rule no longer exists. A repeat ESA claim cannot be made unless an existing condition has significantly worsened or a new condition arises. |
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
Exactly! An independent review where evidence was withheld, lets all go and cheer!. You go and look it up instead of having me do it, there is evidence all over the internet most of it from official sources. However I will give you one to get you started, the changes made to the WCA and the WRAG.
What specific changes that weren't suggested before 2010 or by independent reviews? Why is that so difficult? You must have specific examples in mind, so what are they? |
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,218
|
Quote:
So what? ESA is only concerned with the work environment. If you are suicidal or self-harm and it's not connected to a general work environment, it's not relevant to ESA or this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
How can sick notes be accepted when the DWP has instructed a doctor not to issue any?
The process after an adverse original decision is a mandatory reconsideration. If that fails, you can appeal. At that stage you have to get a sick note to continue. You can get the GP to date it from the day after the original decision. You get backdated ESA and housing benefit, council tax reduction etc. From 2009, ie UNDER LABOUR. Quote:
Edward Graham explains the rules allowing ESA to be paid on repeat claims and pending appeals.
Introduction The first set of official statistics produced by the DWP on the operation of the work capability assessment (WCA) for employment and support allowance (ESA) shows a significantly higher than anticipated failure rate (see article on p. 11 for details). This article examines some of the common issues that arise when entitlement to ESA ends because of a failure to satisfy the WCA, and the options open to claimants to reestablish entitlement. The key legal provision is regulation 30 of the Employment and Support Allowance Regulations 20081which sets out the rules allowing claimants to be paid ESA pending assessment under the WCA. ... Example 2 Betty claimed ESA in January 2009, but failed the WCA on 6th May. She did not appeal as she scored no points and assumed she had no grounds for appeal. She was unable to cope with claiming JSA and in October 2009 she made another claim for ESA. The DWP should accept her claim, but tell her that as it is within 6 moths of a decision that she did not have limited capability for work, she cannot be treated as having limited capability for work pending reassessment under the WCA. She will not be paid benefit until it has been determined whether she actually has limited capability for work. The DWP should arrange a new WCA immediately. If this has not happened by the 6th November (6 months from previous decision), the DWP should begin paying Betty ESA as Regulation 30(1) now applies. |
|
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
Sorry you are incorrect as its part of the ESA WCA handbook. The guidance in the WCA handbook explains to assessors how they should translate ESA regulations 29 and 35, which concern whether decisions to find someone fit for work or able to carry out work-related activity would cause a substantial risk of harm.
Quote:
The guidance makes clear that this provision should only be applied in exceptional circumstances, and that in applying the guidance a two stage process should be followed:
Stage one – assess the evidence of risk of suicide or self-harm Stage two – assess whether substantial risk would be triggered by a finding that the claimant is able to seek employment or is able to undertake activity to prepare them to move towards work (bearing in mind that there is good evidence that the right sort of employment is in general good for mental health). |
|
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,218
|
Quote:
So I'm right in that simply feeling suicidal, because you've been dumped, doesn't count.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,087
|
Quote:
Because LONG-STANDING rules say that they would be ignored.
The process after an adverse original decision is a mandatory reconsideration. If that fails, you can appeal. At that stage you have to get a sick note to continue. You can get the GP to date it from the day after the original decision. You get backdated ESA and housing benefit, council tax reduction etc. From 2009, ie UNDER LABOUR. Again, you state that all he had to do was make a mandatory reconsideration and then appeal, at which point a fit note is required. How can a person continue with an appeal when the doctor has been instructed by the DWP not to issue a fit note? A fit note is medical evidence of not being fit enough to work, that also applies if a claimant is forced to claim JSA after failing a WCA. Please don't suggest yet another scenario in which he could have got a fit note from his doctor and everything would have been fine, he could NOT get a fit note from his doctor as the DWP instructed his doctor not to issue one. |
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 6,834
|
Quote:
Why are people so reluctant to give specific examples of adverse changes?
Changing descriptors wording. So people score less points Reducing the points for descriptors. So people score less points. Having the assessment on what they could be imagined able to do with aids and equipment they do not have and with medical treatments or medicines they are not receiving. So people score less points. Ceasing adding physical and mental descriptors together. So people score less points. Ending passporting of people severely disabled from childhood to contributions based ESA support group. Time limiting contributions based ESA wrag to 12 months. Changing the appeals system. Requiring mandatory reconsideration with no time limit on how long the DWP take and during which ESA is not paid. Removing eligibility for legal aid in the appeal process. For ESA wrag changing the conditionality regime to include indefinite unpaid work placements and changing the sanctions regime increasing sanctions to £73.10 For new claimants of ESA wrag reducing the wrag component to nothing. For new claimants of ESA support group (who live alone and have no one claiming carer's allowance for them) removing eligibility for severe disability premium. Being implemented with Universal credit. |
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...YklEYNYEg5fLxw. A SUICIDAL lorry driver who was declared 'fit for work' by the multinational firm Atos despite his own doctor saying it would be unsafe for him to be on the roads has won his appeal against a decision to strip him of his sickness benefits.
![]() From ORIGINAL law, ie UNDER LABOUR. Quote:
Certain claimants to be treated as having limited capability for work-related activity
35.—(1) A claimant is to be treated as having limited capability for work-related activity if— (a) the claimant is terminally ill; (b) the claimant is— (i) receiving treatment by way of intravenous, intraperitoneal or intrathecal chemotherapy; or (ii) recovering from that treatment and the Secretary of State is satisfied that the claimant should be treated as having limited capability for work-related activity; or (c) in the case of a woman, she is pregnant and there is a serious risk of damage to her health or to the health of her unborn child if she does not refrain from work-related activity. (2) A claimant who does not have limited capability for work-related activity as determined in accordance with regulation 34(1) is to be treated as having limited capability for work-related activity if— (a) the claimant suffers from some specific disease or bodily or mental disablement; and (b) by reasons of such disease or disablement, there would be a substantial risk to the mental or physical health of any person if the claimant were found not to have limited capability for work-related activity. |
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
I doubt that there is much you can tell me that I do not already know about ESA claims. His doctor was instructed by the DWP not to issue a fit note, which in itself is deplorable.
Again, you state that all he had to do was make a mandatory reconsideration and then appeal, at which point a fit note is required. How can a person continue with an appeal when the doctor has been instructed by the DWP not to issue a fit note? A fit note is medical evidence of not being fit enough to work, that also applies if a claimant is forced to claim JSA after failing a WCA. Please don't suggest yet another scenario in which he could have got a fit note from his doctor and everything would have been fine, he could NOT get a fit note from his doctor as the DWP instructed his doctor not to issue one. |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,229
|
Quote:
So what? ESA is only concerned with the work environment. If you are suicidal or self-harm and it's not connected to a general work environment, it's not relevant to ESA or this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,229
|
Quote:
He hadn't appealed, so a sick note wouldn't be accepted at that point. If he had appealed, it would have been accepted. I doubt the GP had been told under no circumstances whatsoever to issue a sick note. By the looks of it, there was no open claim of JSA or ESA, so a sick note was redundant. There was nothing to apply it against. The mandatory reconsideration and appeal phases keep the ESA claim open. If the ESA claim becomes closed, there has to be a fresh claim for JSA or ESA.
The problem appears to be in that example, that either the GP believed they shouldnt be giving sick notes or they didnt feel the patient was sick enough to be signed off. We dont know. However your very back to front thinking in this doesnt make any sense. A person can hardly appeal against a decision if they dont have the sick note to appeal with. |
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
Removing and merging descriptors. So people score less points.
Changing descriptors wording. So people score less points Reducing the points for descriptors. So people score less points. Having the assessment on what they could be imagined able to do with aids and equipment they do not have and with medical treatments or medicines they are not receiving. So people score less points. Ceasing adding physical and mental descriptors together. So people score less points. Ending passporting of people severely disabled from childhood to contributions based ESA support group. Time limiting contributions based ESA wrag to 12 months. Changing the appeals system. Requiring mandatory reconsideration with no time limit on how long the DWP take and during which ESA is not paid. Removing eligibility for legal aid in the appeal process. For ESA wrag changing the conditionality regime to include indefinite unpaid work placements and changing the sanctions regime increasing sanctions to £73.10 For new claimants of ESA wrag reducing the wrag component to nothing. For new claimants of ESA support group (who live alone and have no one claiming carer's allowance for them) removing eligibility for severe disability premium. Being implemented with Universal credit. Changing the ESA WRAG component to nothing is simply RESTORING the previous incapacity benefit situation. Under the old system you got no increase until after 12 months. The implied intention of ESA WRAG is that the medical situation is expected to improve in the next 12 months. Contributions based IB was also time-limited, along with JSA. August 2008 Quote:
The criteria for determination of limited capability for work are set out in the July 2016Welfare Reform Act 2007: The claimant will be considered as having limited capability for work if he: ı scores 15 points in respect of the physical descriptors, or ı 15 points in respect of the Mental Function descriptors or ı 15 points in respect of the descriptors in a combination of mental function and physical descriptors). Quote:
The criteria for determination of limited capability for work are set out in the Regulations: What is the real difference between the two?“The claimant will be considered as having limited capability for work if he/she scores at least: 15 points in respect of the physical descriptors; or 15 points in respect of the Mental Function descriptors; or 15 points in respect of the descriptors in a combination of mental function and physical descriptors The mandatory reconsideration is expected to take 2 weeks. The gap between benefit payments is also 2 weeks, so that alone shouldn't be a problem. It is possible to get a rapid payment of any arrears. Eg My bank account was credited within one hour of the phone call. There are free welfare advice organisations, so why is legal aid needed? |
|
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
Where did you get that from. You do know that someone with a mental health problem may not be able to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
How would a GP know whether the patient had appealed or not? If I go to my GP because I need to be signed off work, I dont tell them or need to tell them if Im making a claim for benefits or whether its for work purposes.
The problem appears to be in that example, that either the GP believed they shouldnt be giving sick notes or they didnt feel the patient was sick enough to be signed off. We dont know. However your very back to front thinking in this doesnt make any sense. A person can hardly appeal against a decision if they dont have the sick note to appeal with. You don't need a sick note to appeal. It's needed to continue getting ESA at the assessment rate and to keep the claim open. You could appeal to the Tribunals service and then get a sick note. |
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,218
|
Quote:
I have an ESA appeal tribunal hearing next month. Does that give a clue as to whether I know what I'm talking about? I seem to include more quotes from official sources than everybody else put together. At least one of us tries to get at the truth of matters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,604
|
Quote:
Good luck with your appeal, are you going to the appeal ? is someone supporting you with your appeal. I had a fresh assessment on the 8 dec, got letter on the 19th support group which has never changed and never likely too
|
|
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 6,834
|
Quote:
Which descriptors? I'll think you'll find most(if not all) of the changes and reductions were suggested in 2009, ie under LABOUR.
I agree that the changes to the ESA descriptors and points all appear to have been made in 2011 and none since, However guidance on some of the descriptors has been changed, this may however be down to case law. Quote:
Changing the ESA WRAG component to nothing is simply RESTORING the previous incapacity benefit situation. Under the old system you got no increase until after 12 months. The implied intention of ESA WRAG is that the medical situation is expected to improve in the next 12 months.
Quote:
Contributions based IB was also time-limited, along with JSA.
Quote:
August 2008
July 2016 What is the real difference between the two? Quote:
The mandatory reconsideration is expected to take 2 weeks. The gap between benefit payments is also 2 weeks, so that alone shouldn't be a problem. It is possible to get a rapid payment of any arrears. Eg My bank account was credited within one hour of the phone call.
Quote:
There are free welfare advice organisations, so why is legal aid needed?
What of the other points I raised in post 65 do you agree they made ESA worse? |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:13.




