Disability discrimination at assessment (Equality Act)

cristobal said:

I agree with @waylay when he says ..."They'll almost certainly pooh-pooh your first formal complaint. Ask for it to be investigated by a Senior Manager. If that doesn't get results, send it to ICE."

I made a complaint about the examination part of my assessment - consent very dubious, procedure not explained, and when I stopped one of the stretching exercises because it hurt  the assessor asked "Are you sure that it's pain?" It was all on a  recording.

My first reply was a total fob-off, seemed to be a pre-formatted letter explaining their 'procedures'.

My next letter was lost.

The second reply - which they said was a 'final look'- did address some of the matters I had raised but not the physical examination. The reply was quite detailed in some areas and I formed the impression that it had been conveniently overlooked, and filed under 'too difficult'

I'd made it clear from the start that I didn't want anyone to be disciplined or sacked, and all that I was seeking was an acknowledgment that the examination was carried out badly, and a promise that the assessor would be advised/ retrained about what they must do as regards consent, claimant being in pain etc. I was left feeling very disappointed that they chose not to do either of these things....

cristobal said:

I agree with @waylay when he says ..."They'll almost certainly pooh-pooh your first formal complaint. Ask for it to be investigated by a Senior Manager. If that doesn't get results, send it to ICE."

I made a complaint about the examination part of my assessment - consent very dubious, procedure not explained, and when I stopped one of the stretching exercises because it hurt  the assessor asked "Are you sure that it's pain?" It was all on a  recording.

My first reply was a total fob-off, seemed to be a pre-formatted letter explaining their 'procedures'.

My next letter was lost.

The second reply - which they said was a 'final look'- did address some of the matters I had raised but not the physical examination. The reply was quite detailed in some areas and I formed the impression that it had been conveniently overlooked, and filed under 'too difficult'

I'd made it clear from the start that I didn't want anyone to be disciplined or sacked, and all that I was seeking was an acknowledgment that the examination was carried out badly, and a promise that the assessor would be advised/ retrained about what they must do as regards consent, claimant being in pain etc. I was left feeling very disappointed that they chose not to do either of these things....

wilko said:

Hello everyone, getting prove and proving what may or did happen is a difficult job in any circumstances unless there are witnesses to back up the accusations that are being disputed. Being persistent and consistent with your approach to proving the incedent happened looks like it’s the only course of action in theses type of cases.

wildlife said:

@Tara100 I have had a complaint with ICE and thought it might be of help to tell you it took them over 2 years to get around to investigating it and when they did they insisted that they only look at system failures. I.e How your complaint was handled by IAS and not anything to do with the assessment or benefit decision. I'm not sure where they drawer the line as to my mind anything that is not done correctly is a system failure. I found a complete wall of defense for the assessor with excuses like it's your word against hers (in my case). In other words they only believe them not us where there is no proof. I really hope you can get justice. 

wildlife said:

@Tara100 I agree that it's important to see the process through to the end although there's still the Parliamentary Ombudsman after ICE. All they did was rolitary cognize that IAS had not responded to my complaint within the time scale set and they had to pay me a consolitary £35 which I consider an insult after all I went through. I was pinning my hopes on ICE doing an independent investigation as their name implies but found they sided with the assessor and in their final report they mentioned that IAS's investigation had found no fault with my report so insinuating they must be right. I was left feeling very let down. This is only my experience, your case is different and one would hope they'll take it very seriously. Good luck...    

twonker said:

Tara100 said:

I thought this went without saying...

For those who don't want it, they will go to assessments at their own risk, and could end up in a scenario like mine. Yes, it's their choice.

Not necessarily. The way the government are looking at it is that it will either be compulsory for all or at best it is for the claimant to opt out.
Even with video taping, nothing is going to stop an assessor from forming their own view/opinion which may well not be the same as what the claimant thinks.
Also, are you seriously thinking that the DWP decision maker is going to review 1 hour or so of video tape before making a decision? If they did that, the queue of claimants waiting for a decision will be unmanageable.
Same will go for a Tribunal, I cannot see a panel having to go through hours of taping for those making appeals.

twonker said:

Tara100 said:

twonker said:

Tara100 said:

I thought this went without saying...

For those who don't want it, they will go to assessments at their own risk, and could end up in a scenario like mine. Yes, it's their choice.

Not necessarily. The way the government are looking at it is that it will either be compulsory for all or at best it is for the claimant to opt out.
Even with video taping, nothing is going to stop an assessor from forming their own view/opinion which may well not be the same as what the claimant thinks.
Also, are you seriously thinking that the DWP decision maker is going to review 1 hour or so of video tape before making a decision? If they did that, the queue of claimants waiting for a decision will be unmanageable.
Same will go for a Tribunal, I cannot see a panel having to go through hours of taping for those making appeals.

You or I do not know the ins-and outs of how the system will work, so let's not waste time speculating eh?
You could make enquiries with the right departments as to how the trial is going if you really want to know.

Call me selfish, but I won't be changing my mind for my own future protection. And on that note, assessors have also been assaulted by clients, and many welcome the new approach for their own safety.

The trial is being carried out on an 'opt out' basis by the claimant. If opting out, sound only will be recorded. Whether that should also be an 'opt out' is another matter. I believe that all recordings, sound or vision, should be carried out with the claimant's prior permission. Far too much big brother has already been forced on us without our permission. 
Claimants for a welfare benefit should not be treated as suspects are in a police interview room.

As for assessors being assaulted. I doubt very much that that is such a significant number that the government want these recordings. In fact just with a quick scan on google assaults on claimants are more prevalent. Assessors have a panic strip around where they sit to press if they feel intimidated.

For me, well I don't want any recordings and if the assessor is unfair or unjust I have the appeal system to fall back on.

As for assessors wanting this system of recording could you please post a link as to where your statement comes from?