IAS say assessors can write what they want on reports

wildlife

Markmywords

"He who pays the piper calls the tune."

The rules are: there are no rules. Other than to reduce the welfare bill, naturally.

Thank goodness for Tribunals.

Barrylad1957

@wildlife
Thanks for sharing this, mate. I have not been assessed for Work Capability nor PIP yet, but I'm speaking to people who have almost daily, and this 'reinterpretation' thang is a recurring, common theme in all of those conversations.
I suppose they have to have the freedom to lie and misrepresent ad infinitum so that a physiotherapist can easily make decisions on how a person's day to day life is stymied by, say, mental illness, or hearing and seeing disability, for instance. I know a lot of these 'assessors' are physios; I had physio for a year in 2015/16, and during that time, I met three different physios who were all bullying, dismissive blokes, who thought that any ailment under the Sun - whether physical or mental - could be cured by increasing physical activity, or exerting yourself more. I've said this on here before, but, everywhere I have ever worked, if you give false facts or misreport incidences and/or events in any report or irims etc., you get sacked, and/or prosecuted, and the same rule should apply to the soldiers of IAS/ATOS etc. Theyre more than likely "self-employed contractors", for the most part, which is a different kettle of fish when it comes to professional responsibility.
I hope your own case gets sorted out and has a good outcome for you.

wildlife

@Markmywords Yes but why should people have to wait months on end and suffer the added stress of a Tribunal making the process so long drawn out. They might as well scrap the assessment process altogether and put the money they would save into financing an impartial panel of experts in the first place working closely with Decision Makers who could have previously decided on the benefit history and evidence whether a face2face was necessary.  

Nystagmite

Right, so if I provide false information to DWP (whether that's about my health, money situation or whatever) I get into trouble for; why is it ok for ATOS to lie? They even sat there and called my GP and ENT doctors liars. Obviously, neither have any idea what they're on about and ATOS know better...

They really should scrap these assessments. I don't see the point of them at all. What really was wrong with the way DLA was done?

wildlife

@Barrylad1957 I'm taking them ICO who regulate the Data Protection Act. The assessor's work for IAS so not self employed. They also come under the regulations for their governing body. So Far all governing bodies are refusing to investigate misconduct out side their profession saying there is a complaint's procedure in place. But I've exhausted that so there's no reason why a fitness to practice case can't be brought against my assessor. I'm trying to find out if she was a qualified Paramedic. If not, bingo I've cracked it. I've come a long way since last January and am not giving up till I meet a brick wall..   

Markmywords

wildlife said:

@Markmywords Yes but why should people have to wait months on end and suffer the added stress of a Tribunal making the process so long drawn out. They might as well scrap the assessment process altogether and put the money they would save into financing an impartial panel of experts in the first place working closely with Decision Makers who could have previously decided on the benefit history and evidence whether a face2face was necessary.  

Oh the gov/dwp don't want accurate decisions @wildlife. They want cheap decisions without taking responsibility.

The default position is "No, you don't qualify."

It's across all gov departments too. I'm now dealing with the HMRC operating a 25% claw back of annual Tax Credits for the second year running. They don't answer to a Tribunal and they don't publish their calculations or formulae.

Anyone would think I'm trying to finance my second yacht with the proceeds!

Matilda

@wildlife

An 'impartial' panel working closely with Decision Makers would not be impartial as they would be their close colleagues and funded by the DWP.  The point of Tribunals is that they are independent of the DWP and not funded by them.

Barrylad1957

@wildlife
It will, hopefully, soon become apparent to even the hubris ridden dwp that this exercise is not cost effective, and, indeed, may end up as a financial 'negative equity' sort of deal. Almost everyone I have spoken to both on here, and in life, who have been to either a wc or pip assessment have the same story behind their plight; assessment, claim denied, and then, if not turned over at MR stage, a massive number of the people I know of get granted benefit due by an appeal; this means that the programme isnt working properly, and that a lot of their staff are liars. I've been told by friends working in the nhs that they have heard of some of these so-called 'assessors' earning literally thousands of pounds a month: that camel's back will break, eventually - this 'government' of clerks will do their sums, and pull the plug. Making a few physios and mental health 'nurses' rich was almost certainly not a part of Blair's plan when he unleashed this little known firm upon the disabled in the UK, and not getting vfm is something that we all know will enrage the tories. A half decent accountant would have seen through them by now. The reason, I reckon, that the majority of the hcp's at assessment behave like its the Last Days Of Rome is because they know that it is.

wildlife

Daniel

First Face to Face for PIP was carried out by an Occupational Therapist, which was granted straight away. She was so professional and understood everything I told her regarding my conditions. The reassessment was carried out by a nurse who blatantly did not understand my illnesses and how they effect me, the PIP was removed. Having gone through their so called appeal system, they believed everything she reported, disregarding professional supportive evidence, right up to Tribunal level. I had no choice but to put in another claim, again the assessor was a nurse who clearly did not understand my conditions and despite me having aids to help me, she dotted all the boxes stating I could manage 100%. She reported I had managed movements impossible for me to do because of cervical metal fitted in one of many operations and I did not have any kind of physical exam at all! I eventually managed to take this to mandatory reconsideration and my PIP has just been reinstated but only backdated to the second assessment, losing me 11 months benefit from when it was removed!  Low and behold, I now am entering the next stage where my ESA support group is being reassessed - part of the huge plan to hope people will give up - not a chance!!

Daniel

I think the backlog needs to be sorted. People should not have to wait so long for decisions. Why are they reassessing more and more people instead of clearing up all these unacceptable queues of claimants? Why don't they believe and take notice of the professionals and family GPs who are more familiar with the claimant? Sick people are not the ones receiving the huge pay!  It must be costing a fortune, especially if people do not give up without a fight.

ChrisG

How do you think the Government is able to find the extra billions to fund their policies? They know that for at least a whole year they will not have to fork out peoples benefits and then they can pay the backdated money from the savings they make from denying the new lot of claims that they also control the date of “inviting” them to claim.  Why else would you need to set a target for denying mandatory reconsiderations? It’s just a massive pyramid scheme that allows the government to divert funds.

Daniel

I agree just a pity they pick on the ill who cannot fight back in this so called civilised country?

Waylay

@ChrisG Funny thing: they're not actually making any savings! They're spending money to do this to us....

Waylay

@Daniel Agree that they should stop reassessing until backlog is cleared! They won't because the backlog almost certainly causes some claimants not to appeal, or to drop their appeal. More people off benefits....

clarabelle

Cheshire2

You never know your luck:

I was disgusted with my wife's health "professional"'s report, so I wrote a complaint to IAS ("a trading name of Atos").  

We received a 7 page reply.   The first 3-4 are an endorsement of the wonderful, experienced, highly-trained, expert HP.   They then recommend an extra 4 points because of deficiencies in 2 descriptors, admit she should have looked into something in more detail and promise to give her feedback on proof-reading!

Not everything we wanted, but very nice to send to the Tribunal.   Helps to devalue the rest of the report as well.

Incidentally, one of the paragraphs in our letter starts with the same wording as your quote, the rest of that paragraph being broadly similar.