A change in the rules?

@Whatthe i was one of those that altered the system in 2011 and again in 2014, and you are correct some did take their eye off the ball, (Benefit being paid) I didn't. I have been involved with the writing of the "White Paper" presented to parliament EACH YEAR, and that the DWP say they will change, but after a few months the same ASSESSORS are doing the same assessments with the same out come.

The 2014 Social Security Act was based on DS V DWP, who do you think DS is? it goes back further than that to 2008 as well. these ACT's and Laws were changed under the Professor Harrington Reports that were in excess of 1200 PAGES of errors against the DWP. Why do you think that ATOS suddenly gave up a £650 MILLION POUND CONTRACT TO ASSESS CLAIMANTS. Because I took them to court and they decided that a week before the hearing to hand back the Contract, saying that they wanted to protect the Assessors that were being verbally abused on a daily basis?

They have a legal team to protect their employees? Ian Dunken Smith took over and it took me another 2 1/2 years to get him to court. YES, 3 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, he jacked it in saying "I cannot continue in this position as my heart is saying one thing and others are telling me something else.

Before I continue, who is hiring the Assessment companies to assess us? If you didn't know, 3 years ago in another court case going to court again, CAPITA rebranded and called them selves Capita-PIP, to help with the admin side of things, and so they would not have to keep asking for permission to access files presented to them for different benefits.

YOUR ESA ASSESSMENT WHICH GAVE YOU YOUR ENTITLEMENTS TO THAT BENEFITS, CAN BE USED IN OTHER BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS, since YOU only have ONE MEDICAL HISTORY, ONE BODY, and probably more than 3 Doctors, Nurses, Physio treatment plans, and PRESCRIPTION DRUGS ISSUED EITHER WEEKLY OR MONTHLY that CANNOT BE PURCHASED OVER THE COUNTER, since some of these drugs if you read some of the side effects CAN CAUSE DEATH.

IN 2020 After waiting another 2 years for the DWP to decide to react to a court directive, and the 13 month rule to reply or the case would be heard in their absence, and the Judge giving a further 11 MONTHS OF EXTENTIONS TO THE 5 DAY DEAD LINE. I applied back to LONDON and within 3 days I had a dedicated Lady from PIP on my case which took 10 weeks to put back all the paperwork altered by the DWP. 20 September 2020 a High Court gave me back all my benefits. It took the DWP 1 day to **** it up. They placed another "Operative on the case to pay out, they did not read the notes correctly, they paid some of the benefits back, got the wrong start date, wrong end date, as there was no end date, it said never to be assessed again? They gave me a 2 month Certificate to be assessed in 2 months, and a certificate that would not allow me to get a Mobility Vehicle? THAT TOOK ANOTHER 7 MONTHS TO GET A CERTIFICATE THAT WAS, OR HAD ONE YEARS LIFE ON IT?

Mobility could not understand what was going on and I was allowed to order the vehicle which I had 10 months after winning my case.

In getting my claim reinstated and because of the Changes to Universal Credit, and many of the Charters and Laws befoire and after the Pandemic ANY ASSESSMENT FOR BENEFITS CAN BE CROSS REFERENCED TO ANOTHER BENEFIT, especially since the U C states it is an access to Financial help for a benefit and does not require a medical, BUT, as I have stated before if a "report" produced by the DWP is to be used for access to benefits it must FOLLOW ALL THE RULES, and since the Medical Assessment for ESA was used, then it would have given the Decision Maker an insite to your medical condition under the ESA rules, and there would have been no need for another assessment unless the Decision Maker did not understand the result of that assessment.

If I am to get access to a Medical Benefit like PIP then I want to be examined by a qualified person, not some one giving an opinion , of what they think, to a decision Maker to use, instead of Medical evidence you have supplied.

Yes I do realise what I say, and have actually toned down the reason I am called one big voice, as I will not give up, all I ask of the DWP is to give a fair assessment, first time, and in a reasonable time scale, and have never refused this. But I will not stand by after winning not only my cases but that of others who because they have not been paid the correct rate or been badgered to excepting a lower rate with the explination of look we have looked at your case and we have decided that we can allow you some extra points to get middle rate for one or Enhanced rate for one but can't give you the other points needed with some back pay, but if you go to court you may get the points you need but they can also take them from you and you can get less or have the whole claim removed?

This is not acceptable, as this has been said to Cancer patients, and somne one that was about to go in for a Brain operation saying they saw none of the conditions on the form at the interview?

Now all of a sudden they can diagnose brain surgery as well. Since then this person has had two brain operations, been taken away from the appointee's care, placed in TWO different hostles with 2 children and is actually going down to surgery as I am writing this.

I know because she is my daughter.

I edo not blaim you, as people give up when confronted with the DWP and the wording of documents, so most give up. I DON'T and am back in courty on the 23rd April this year after another 5 month wait, followed by 3 other cases that had the same fate as mine. ZERO Benefits.

I hope admin post this as there is light at the end of the tunnel and we don't have to take things lying down and except what we are given. There is more than one law that protects us all whether going into work, being told you are no longer able to have this benefit or a reduction in the amount, my case is again to discuss the fraud, assault on me, and the complete lack of adhering to a judges direction, and I will be seeking compensation for what this has done.

I would like to point out, that the decision maker hires the assessor to complete a report on the Claimant because he has no medical background to verify medicines taken, information supplied by the claimant or medical professional on the NHS to say its a quick fix or not.

They (BOTH) know the rules and the decision maker relys on the contractual obligations by assuming that the ASSESSOR HAS A MEDICAL BACKGROUND, and is registered on the day of the assessment.

The decision maker should also know that any report written about a claimant should have a certain standard and know (BOTH) what the consequences are by not abiding to the Bond Solon Rules.

Yet the decision maker says he gives out a contract to assess, and it is the assessment company that needs to show supporting evidence.

Well if that was the case no one is checking an assessment report for accuracy or conforming to the Laws of assessment where the claimant is allowed to see the report when it is sent to the decision maker, why do they say that the assessment report is for the decision maker and if you want a copy you have to apply to the DWP/PIP for a copy. As this comes under the Data Protection Act of information being held on a Government computer without your permission. How can he make an informed decision if the report has no supporting evidence except their opinion, and the decision maker would not know if that was correct or not as he has no medical Background?

I AM SORRY YOU ARE COMPLETLY WRONG.

THE IDEA OF THIS DISCUSSION IS NOT TO STEP BACK, but to get involved.

what have I said a thousand times when teaching…… The most stupid question is a question NOT ASKED.

I say this to everyone, really. In order to understand any system you have to ask questions of the system. Here we place a post where contributions and OPINIONS are welcome as we are all on the same side here. I do not profess to know everything, and looking at some of the posts they are brilliant, and probably even better than me. I am not here to show how smart I am or that I know more than anyone else, but to share my experiences so that the system where ever it is ACCESSED IS THE SAME.

If I win a case on the fact that certain things are missing thern we all learn from the experience. This is where not publishing the results of the turned over Tribunal the DWP win as they deal with each case individually where as we are all assessed with the same foremat. So this is why I collate every thing in a presentation. SO don't step back keep asking we are not philidelphia lawyers we are Disabled or long term sick trying to get the entitlements we are entitled to.

Never think I know more as I don't we all have a skill and where we are now winning is one voice has become two and six now hundreds thats why it will only take one to go to court to change everything.

Look at the steel works and China, the home truths are coming out now.

I have mentioned in my posts many Acts and Laws, and have also mentioned one rule the Bond Solon Rule Part 35 Section 2.

For those that have not used this or for those that are "Inquisitive" like me and need the real answers in plain English. This is where I come in.

I have taken my tribunal representation to another level, since I was told many years ago to go and learn my trade if I intend to represent people at Court or Tribunals. (This coming from a Judge that was "hung out to dry by me" in a Tribunal to test what I knew about the Judicial System, and not the representation of someone in court that had their Benefits removed who had cancer, who was assessed by Capita and later Maximus and their reports.)

The Bond Solon Rules DEAL WITH "Expert Witnessess" that can be used by either party, as a rebuttal or support for a "CLAIM" The claim includes Benefits, since in being assessed for access to benefits, both Medical and Financial all who assess come under the Expert Witness Statements.

This rule sets out in the first instance who can get or apply this, but the Second Part deals with 10 specific points for "the Expert Witness" that MUST be adhered to, and what happens when a failure to comply with the ruling or at a Tribunal, the court decision and directives to either party based on the Expert Witness Statement, and the Secretary of State directives to rectify the "error" or mandate when applied to a "Claw back of payments" or "Back payment" of benefits should the Statement made by the Decision Maker on his behalf, be found to be of such a poor quality that it cannot be used in Court, or the Decision Maker has failed in his Duty of Care to make the final decision based on all the available evidence.

This also includes the next stage of what the DWP and Secretary of State do to make sure this is really a one off, and could also involve:

Looking at the Assessors previous reports and content: a period to be determined by the DWP who hired them. Retrasining of the assessor, if found that this is not a one off, suspension till the correct level of assessment is achieved, and may also involve, "shadowing someone for 6 months" before being signed off to assess again, and also lends the Assessor, especially, and the Decision Maker to be taken to a Civil Proceedings where compensation can and is allowed by the CLAIMANT.

This is not the whole Act ("WEALTHFARE" SORRY THAT ME.) (WELFARE REFORM ACT 2007.) (USED BY OUR CHANCELLOR)

You don't need to be a lawyer but you also have to remember that we are already being assessed by the NHS every time we see a GP or attend any treatment, you just have to be aware of the consequences, because you are supplying information about you, or a loved one or friend, that can be used against you for fraud against the system. You also have to remember that all you have to do is fill out the appropiate forms and send them in to make a claim and give as much information about you as you can, and let the experts, at DWP, do what they do best, and that is to assist, sorry assess you for access to benefits.

DO YOU REALLY NEED TO KNOW ALL THIS AS JUST ONE PART OF HOW TO FILL OUT A FORM?

Search Legislation

Title:Year:Number:Type:All UK Legislation (excluding originating from the EU)--------------------------------------------All Legislation (including originating from the EU)--------------------------------------------All Primary Legislation    UK Public General Acts    UK Local Acts    UK Private and Personal Acts    Acts of the Scottish Parliament    Acts of Senedd Cymru    Acts of the National Assembly for Wales    Measures of the National Assembly for Wales    Church Measures    Acts of the Northern Ireland Assembly    Acts of the Old Scottish Parliament    Acts of the English Parliament    Acts of the Old Irish Parliament    Acts of the Parliament of Great Britain    Local Acts of the Parliament of Great Britain    Private and Personal Acts of the Parliament of Great Britain    Northern Ireland Orders in Council    Measures of the Northern Ireland Assembly    Acts of the Northern Ireland Parliament--------------------------------------------All Secondary Legislation    UK Statutory Instruments    Wales Statutory Instruments    Scottish Statutory Instruments    Northern Ireland Statutory Rules    Church Instruments    UK Ministerial Directions    UK Ministerial Orders    UK Statutory Rules and Orders    Northern Ireland Statutory Rules and Orders--------------------------------------------All Legislation originating from the EU    Regulations originating from the EU    Decisions originating from the EU    Directives originating from the EU    European Union Treaties--------------------------------------------All Draft Legislation    UK Draft Statutory Instruments    Scottish Draft Statutory Instruments    Northern Ireland Draft Statutory Rules--------------------------------------------All Impact Assessments    UK Impact AssessmentsSearchAdvanced Search

SECTION 11.

11Work-focused health-related assessments

(1)Regulations may make provision for or in connection with imposing on a person who is—

(a)entitled to an employment and support allowance, and

(b)not a member of the support group,

a requirement to take part in one or more work-focused health-related assessments as a condition of continuing to be entitled to the full amount payable to him in respect of the allowance apart from the regulations.

(7)In this section, “work-focused health-related assessment” means an assessment by a health care professional approved by the Secretary of State which is carried out for the purpose of assessing—

(a)the extent to which a person still has capability for work,

(b)the extent to which his capability for work may be improved by the taking of steps in relation to his physical or mental condition, and

(c)such other matters relating to his physical or mental condition and the likelihood of his obtaining or remaining in work or being able to do so, as may be prescribed.

(8)In subsection (7), “health care professional” means—

(a)a registered medical practitioner,

(b)a registered nurse,

(c)an occupational therapist or physiotherapist registered with a regulatory body established by an Order in Council under section 60 of the Health Act 1999 (c. 8), or

(d)a member of such other profession regulated by a body mentioned in section 25(3) of the National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002 (c. 17) as may be prescribed.

This is only one section, and in SECTION 8. STATES REGISTERED, or OCCUPATIONALTHERAPIT REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 25(3) of the National Service Reform and Health Care Professionals ACT 2002 (c. 17) as may be prescribed.

What this is in plain English is, its no good stating that its the Assessors fault and need to take it up with them, or the report has to come from them as we have no control over what is in the content of the report.

Both statements are incorrect as you now fall into CANDOUR, which covers "sub contractors" in this case ATOS, Maximus, Concentrix, Capita, and Capita PIP, or any other "expert" or Private Doctor used to support a report in that field of Medicine.

So there you have it a flavour of my world. BUT, again, these are my opinions, and I do welcome writing these posts as it gives me a chance to present in my head which direction I am going, and also welcome any comments as I tweak the post on my side to suit and check where I am.

Your comments are welcome. (I know for some it's over the top, but for me it's the ability to share experience, and if one person reading this becomes more relaxed with an intended assessment, then I have done my bit, as I have never said not to except an assessment, because we have to start some where, but just to know that the person who is assessing me is qualified to do so.

Imagine if the NHS decided to cut the back log of A and E waiting times by hiring people who always wanted to treat people and at a younger age played Doctors and Nurses, and thought "one day" as I can put sticking plasters on anything? Then paying them a good wage to do so, with a bomus on how many you can see in a day?