do the press know?

rhinos

what we promise

2. we will look at all the information you and your GP........have given

This is totally  misleading-can we get a letter together for a newspaper ( polly tonbee-sorry not sure of the spelling)  Even tho they ask for your GP's address they dont  write to them!!

with a good amount of  signatures on it

I am not skilled at this  but maybe some of you are?

I dont this  scam is  known about by  joe public?

rhinos

I am writing to scope press-having chatted with them this afternoon

it maybe useful to have support from folk on here- who like me where duped into believing pips would automatically write to my GP

my education is good-a dr-fellow-cambridge educated-5 degrees- but never saw this duplicity coming

if folk could indicate any support and if possible-speak to press about it-anonymously?

Topkitten

I believe they don't do anything at all that might help a claim and do everything possible (including using falsehoods) to deny it. They could only get away with it if the government supports it.

TK

rhinos

 Hi Bernie  ( scope media office)

  I am a dr in mental health -cambridge grad -fellow -5 degrees on -and was duped by this MOVING FROM DLA TO PIPS ASSESSMENT "what we promise to do" page four ( understanding your personal independence payment assessment) "we will look at all the information you,your GP and any others involved in your care have given you, to make sure we assess your fairly" In reality ,although you are asked when filling the form ,all your GP contact details and any main specialist,at no point pre PIPS assessment do they write to your GP-or specialist-and also fail approximately half of their clients-having gained no medical evidence from the GP. Over half will fail mobility by reaching the examination room-set more that 20 metres away for this intent. This gives a totally erroneous false impression to joe public going through PIPS- that pre assessment and at interview all of this work will have been completed. I think the way the promise is worded in tantamount to deception. I would hope that some media coverage could give this concern its rightful airing

and sent to Polly Toynby of the guardian

ps  what chance has Joe Public

rhinos

PS also sent to my MP

Nystagmite

They don't look at the information your GP or medical professionals write. How do I know this?

ENT - "******* (me) has mild hearing loss in one ear, hyperacusis, and Auditory Processing Disorder. Most like caused by Topiramate"

GP - "***** (me) is registered as partially sighted with Nystagmus and Optic Atrophy"

ATOS Nurse "because you hear, there's nothing wrong" um, she asked what hyperacusis was and quite clearly doesn't understand the words "processing disorder". I can and do hear. But what you say and what I hear aren't the same thing. 

Because I couldn't provide them with a 9 year piece of paper (that they already had) I'm not registered partially sighted and can probably drive. I just choose not to.  My GP only has 27 years of notes from the opticians and eye hospital.

Markmywords

This is the rule rather than the exception @rhinos .

Since the DWP will fabricate an utterly ridiculous and fictitious decision anyway, the impact of it is not significant.

Actually many people have used their practice of avoiding evidence as an opportunity.

When the time comes to appeal the work of fiction they create, actions such as this prove so damaging to their case that they have practically already beaten themselves before it gets to court.