A change in the rules?

onebigvoice

I agree, and as I have stated, it was my intention to get everyone talking about a post. And it has certainly done that.

As a Shop Steward, my skills do not lie in winners and losers, or that opinions of the problem cannot be resolved by Discussion and compromise. I do not believe in striking to make a point heard, but in 1 or 2 cases, when working, even the threat of action can be enough, although I don't like this avenue. I have given the DWP many chances to resolve the issues they cause. But they believe that the threat of removing benefits would resolve their issues. It makes matters worse for them under the Duty of Care, to not place the claimant in harm or debt because of their actions…. Does this sound familiar…..

Sorry for the caplocks I keep forgetting to switch them off. And in my early days always used cap letters as I used print in my handwritten documents and can't quite get out of the habbit My apologies to all.

WhatThe

OBV, only yesterday I discovered I lived in one of five trial areas for moving Incapacity Benefits claimants onto Pathways to Work in 2011 (I was over the threshold in the Mental Health Assessment and PCA exempt). I had been contacted in 2008 for a single appointment with them.

I was put on Pathways and twice mandated to attend the Work Programme. Twice the WP provider returned me to JCP stating work-related activity (WRA) was not suitable for me. JCP requested a 'work available report' (WAR) which cleared my profile of any barriers to work. The WP provider produced a second WAR for me which told an altogether different story such as me not attending during those 4 years.

All the evidence - medical included - was available to DWP at all times. I am not proof that their schemes work. I am proof that ill-health and/or disability is not a choice - I am far from well as a result of this trauma.

onebigvoice

The Bond Solon Rules do apply to the Judicial System, but, when applied to the "ASSESSMENT PROCESS" There are strick guide lines as to how and what is needed to write a report, what it should contain, (including all the available evidence from the claimant, including medical support letters and forms filled in.) It has guidelines for the Decision Maker, (which also includes the guidelines set by the DWP) that MUST be adhered to. The content of the report written by the Decision Maker and the supporting evidence as to how they arrived at the decision,

WhatThe

Like you, my appeal was successful at Tribunal but not applied to my claim by DWP. The decision was never uploaded onto the system.

WhatThe

Hi Scope.

I noticed on a few threads that I can't access the first page and this is one of them. Do you know why this happens?

Thanks.

Rosie_Scope

Hi @WhatThe, there's been a couple of threads like this, I've experienced it myself lately. I'm not too sure but I'll pass this on to see if there's a solution. Thanks for letting us know!

onebigvoice

My avenue left to me by the DWP is again reapply to the PHSO in London. And low and behold they gave me three reference numbers to keep the files separate (why I don't know because they all involve the Decision Maker, the Assessment Company report and the Assault in my own home by one of their own, and the Secretary of State who was supinada to attend three times before they turned up, then said they were not their to discuss compensation or the request of the PDF Documents used by the DWP to pay the incorrect rate of back pay, let alone compensation.

Last week, I again started proceedings against the DWP for failure to abide by a judge's directional notice (not updating their files), failure to produce the PDF documents I requested (including my signature to state I had seen them and agreed to their content, or even the correct PDF file)

The fight to get justice for the Disability Cause should never be like this, since the people in charge are supposed to uphold the agreements and negotiated laws, and give support to the disabled community, which includes the people on-long-term-sick.

The budget given, is NOT for people who have been left stagnant on the dole, who could work without restrictions or adaptations to the workplace, but OH that's right, they closed 800 job centers around the country to use A I to clear the back log of work given to the Job centre plus staff.

If there are so many people on the dole, then why not rehire the staff who are already trained in the system and open the job centers back up.

Its because they probably did them all a favour by getting jobs in Tescos, or Aldi's to name some who pay more with less stress and value their workers.

My time is being used by others because I intend to make another change to the system of assessment by showing the System at what it does best. Do I need to spell it out? As the joke I wrote implies, if you want a fancy title on your CV, and you want to be paid Big Bucks, then learn the job at hand and see what improvements can be made to "keep" the workforce you spent ages training and then loose because "you" set impossible targets with unmeasured results.

Accountability, is the key, even if you have left the job, or stepped aside, accountability will still get you, along with case history.

People coming up for renewal of their claim are sent a form to fill in and hope that errors since the last reports you sent in will not give you the extra points or change the points as to what you need.

History states if your condition has deterated and you have supporting letters to state this then the form should state: (From you) I have still not received the evidence used to assess my claim and give me the ratees I have, since the medical evidence I sent in, I believe was overlooked. I now include an up to date letter from my GP and people that treat me and also show periods of illness going back to your last assessment of me.

Please supply me with the relevant information I require since mine is on headed paper where yours is not even signed.

Stand up for your rights no matter how long it takes. Sign the petition for your M P to vote against the cuts to be made since I see no formal notice of this or that the cuts as we already know will plundge more people into debt and poverty.

These people are supposed to help us not cut our benefits to support other ablebodied people into work.

onebigvoice

This is a typical response to pensions from the DWP:

"The measures in our Pension Schemes Bill will drive costs down and returns up on workers' retirement savings - putting more money in people's pockets to the tune of up to £29,000 for an average earner and delivering on our Plan for Change."

So, 1. Why has pensions become a means-tested benefit?

2. Like the other increases to the Pension, which was swallowed up in Tax, so that of the £85 given, I saw £2.95, has the personal allowance been increased to allow this figure to actually mean something.

3. If the Pension is a means-tested benefit, then why are some allowed to claim PENSION CREDITS, and some are not. If a pension becomes a means-tested benefit, then the tax allowances for those who own their own home, or have a private pension, are also taken into account already, so where is the increase?

When I took my pension, I had £68,000 in Tax before it went into my pension pot, leaving me with hardly anything. (because I was over the limit in the savings pot) So what is the point of investing in your own pension pot if when you retire people who do not have a private pension get more?

Your comments on why save for a pension whenthey take it at 85% IN THE POUND OVER THE LIMITS.