Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Some of you may find these links of interest

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...it?INTCMP=SRCH

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...osing-benefits

For me its not just about reform, which is needed, but the depth and speed they are pushing this agenda.

We have IB to ESA
DLA changing to a PIP ( Personal Independence Payment )
Housing benefit being changed

Appeals being won are increasing

Double whammy for some families as if DLA is lost so too is Carers Allowance.

When most groups/charities take place in the Hardest Hit protests, when CAB advisors and welfare rights officers tell you the new system is not working, that changes ahead are not for the benefit of the person claiming but purely a cuts exercise, surely alarm bells should be ringing louder.

These proposals may not affect you now but could do so in the future.

If we add in cuts to social services, criteria for care being tightened, meals on wheels being priced out of reach. Respite places getting less. How much added pressure can some families take.

It is vital that we build a strong foundation for any new system, that is not happening just now. All the govt are doing is slash and burn...cut cut cut.

Sorry for the rant, mean no offence to anyone here but whether it affects us or not we should be looking out for those that cant do it for themselves cos this govt is certainly not doing so.

---------- Post added at 10:57 ---------- Previous post was at 10:55 ----------

Can I just add that some of these proposals are following on from the Labour govt. Just so noone thinks I am just against the present Coalition

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

This is the form that a doctor who performs a home visit or a EMP as its known fills in.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...n%20report.pdf

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

for what?

its becoming a habit of you guys to ask for links on anything I post.

You want a link of something I said that had no media coverage?

---------- Post added at 17:22 ---------- Previous post was at 17:18 ----------

Included in those cuts is a very shrewd removal of legal aid as well, a service people can use to appeal against loss of benefit.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Two points to make, How much money is spent on benefit, nothing is being said about how much money is being fiddled by MPs, who take on invisible staff from families, or how much money is spent on refurbishing offices that don't need it.

With this new plan from Muppet Cameron is making of making people on benefit earn it, how ?

You are not going to make people work 5/8 hours per day on £65 /70 per week, that would be totally unfair, they cannot be forced to take work, unless the wages are reasonable, especially when they have a family.

The reason why there are so many immigrant workers in this country is that employers are not stupid, if they can make money by paying less for an immigrant worker, they will do.

Cameron has to come up with a better reason, like promoting British companies in Europe, which he doesn't do, then work will come to this country.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Ranty rant rant.....

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

As a Carer I am paid £55.55 for a minimum 35 hour week... with no holidays

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

My wife does the same for my son 24 hours per day, but this is NOT the point l am making.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

It's not the disabled who are the target. It's the fraudsters who are claiming DLA, when they aren't entitled to it.

---------- Post added at 21:25 ---------- Previous post was at 21:22 ----------

People will always ask for links in forums if they don't believe you.

If it is that important to them, then they can do the research themselves....don't be bullied.

---------- Post added at 21:25 ---------- Previous post was at 21:25 ----------

Actually restbite is available

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Sorry, asking for someone to provide provenance for a statement they have made is "bullying"?

Some of us like facts in our discussions, rather than just hearsay, prejudice, and rants - ymmv.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

But some people won't believe anything without links. And they will use the fact that someone hasn't provided links as proof that they can't possibly be telling the truth.

I have personally been accused of making things up that are actually facts, just because I don't post links. Well if I know something because I am directly connected to it, then I don't need to come up with a link. You can either believe me, or not.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

There is a balance with links to be honest.

I have been accused of making things up on here, when I have mentioned a discussion between a group of people outside of the realms of the internet, but if you can provide a link to back you up, all the better.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Tim if these measures only hit the frauds i would be supporting it as much as anyone but they don't. I believe currently 70% of appeals are successful clearly something is very wrong and not working as intended. Between the cost of the incompetency that is atos and the cost of the appeals procedure i would reckon any saving is probably lost.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

The system is far from perfect. And I think the main problem is contracting private companies to carry out the work. After all companies are there to make a profit, the DLA aren't. So who would be best to regulate the system?

It would be interesting to see just how atos are funded. I bet it is on the number of cases, in which case it is in their interest to stop people DLA, and then for them to have an appeal.

Maybe this is something that Watchdog should investigate.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Whatever happened to ?

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

There appears to be confusion between people doubting individuals' Subject Matter Expertise, gained through lifetime experience, and asking for verification of a claim that a major news organisation, which is seen as one of the main communicators of unbiased (as far as that is possible) news to the world, is deliberately suppressing news stories due to an anti-benefits claimant agenda. If the BBC are doing this, it needs to be publicised.

You state that if you know something because you are directly linked to it, you don't need to post a link - but many others state they "know" things, but in fact are distorting / making things up, so how are other CF'ers supposed to differentiate between those who make things up to further their agenda, and those whose positions are factually-based?

---------- Post added at 08:34 ---------- Previous post was at 08:24 ----------

The process is that ATOS Origin carry out the assessments, these are then sent to the DWP Decision Makers (ATOS have no part in the DM process, besides providing the information), and then the DMs make a decision (which can go to appeal).

ATOS Origin are not involved after the assessment, and they do not get any extra money if it goes to appeal*.

*This information is from someone who works at the Disability & Carers Service part of the DWP, specifically in Customer Service (helping claimants fill in the forms, and general advice and outreach), who works with the DMs, and also deals with complaints from claimants (and has done so for the last 30 years).

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Now this is where I do have a problem, what you state is true, but seems only part of the truth.

ATOS do only assess, but you fail to mention they also give their 'opinion' of the person they are assessing, and they also seem to supply certain information as they see fit, that or omit certain information. So to give off as fact that ATOS doesn't have anything to do with a decision is totally wrong. But this is just my opinion of course. :)

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

20 years and NO respite ever available here, even for one evening. Respite is a myth as far as I, and probably most Carers, know.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Yes this rings very true in our family and many others.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Well ask then, because you are entitled to it.

---------- Post added at 11:22 ---------- Previous post was at 11:20 ----------

I'm not even going to discuss it with you, because your name fits, and you just argue for the sake of it.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

My brother and other members of our wider family has asked many times Tim and each time they have been refused.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

I'm sorry to say this, but maybe they aren't entitled.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

:dig:

---------- Post added at 11:46 ---------- Previous post was at 11:36 ----------

You can watch Channel 4s Thought TV episodes on this subject which includes the author of the blog 'diaryofabenefitscrounger' as part of the 'debate'.

http://www.4thought.tv/themes/is-eve...led-to-welfare

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Yes he and many others were entitled to it but the system is so haphazardly run and is basically a postcode lottery where in some areas you might get it and many other areas you have got no chance od getting it.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Timothy,

I'm not "arguing" with you, I merely asked how you managed to arrive at two entirely contradictory positions within a few posts.

Do you know how you did this or not?

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

I am fortunate to live in leicestershire where we have a brilliant carer's organisation called CLASP they are the only reason i got the DLA i should have and they support carer's all year round. Thats one of the first big problems with the system right there that people have to have groups to help them get what they are entitled too is stupid.

As for how do you improve the system how about actually involving the nhs people that are familiar with those of us on long term IB instead of asking a useless organisation like atos who sometimes don't even have properly qualified people doing assessments ask the real professionals who deal with us all year round.

If the government was really interested in cutting fraud surely the nhs could play both a massive and very useful part in that. As i have said on here and other places in the past i think the system needs to split into medically confirmed and non medically confirmed because if people have a genuine problem the consultants\gp's\nurses may not be able to give an exact diagnosis but they can attest there is a genuine problem.

There are many ideas from many qualified people on how the system can be improved and streamlined for the benefit of both the claimants and the taxpayer and neither this government or the last was interested. Instead going for headline grabbing tar brushing generalisations that placate the very loud vocal minority spurred on by the likes of the daily hate.

Fact is the vulnerable in this country make such a slow moving easy target for any person looking for a scapegoat. In reality they talk about wanting to do this and that but at the end of the day change very little because then they would lose their scapegoat. Genuine claimants get hit a lot more then the frauds because most of us who are genuine hate being on benefit we hate feeling like scroungers and it takes little to push us to the point of not claiming although we end up hurting ourseleves more.

Frauds don't care, they don't have any guilt and they don't have any problem with what they do and they always update themselves on the latest changes and work ways round it. They can only do that because we have a section of welfare that deals with medical problems and doesn't actually listen to the very service in this country that is tasked with helping those of us with problems funny that isn't it.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

I know things are far from perfect. However they must have been border line to be turned down.

---------- Post added at 15:40 ---------- Previous post was at 15:39 ----------

I didn't. Stop twisting things

goodbye

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Why are you going somewhere :)

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

I'm not going anywhere, I'm just ignoring people who love to argue for the sake of it.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Sounds more like evading having to answer to your contradictory posts, imho.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Timothy old chap, here they are again, your words.

Followed just a few hours later by...

Now, which words did I twist?

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

No. I'm just ignoring someone who argues for the sake of arguing. Which is also what you seem to be starting to do.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

In fairness Tim you do appear to contradict yourself and people are just asking you to clarify.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Keep that reasoning up and you will have no one to debate with :)

---------- Post added at 10:11 ---------- Previous post was at 10:09 ----------

Depends if those that are making a post can be trusted to post accurate information or are basing there posts on there own assumptions or rants.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

What makes me laugh is reading on here how some people claim they're unfit to work but then you see them on here 10 hours a day posting comments.

Surely if the DWP looked on this site it would show these people could work as data inputters, or a similar desk based job? Even on a production line that you could work on whilst seated?

Personally I have only had 2 weeks out of work since I left school, but then I am a very motivated person and I always see what I can do , not what I can't.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Hi New to cable, What you have to realise is that, that there are genuine people that are unfit for work, and those that just scam the system, and l know a few over the years.

The system needs a total change in how it describes 'unfir for work'

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Have you been in and out of hospital for 11 years and have you had 7 operations including 3 10 to 12 hour ones and have you had to 2 devices implanted no l don,t think so.:mad:

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

The fact he went red the same day he joined would give you an idea about the type of post we see from new to cable ;)

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Yes l have noticed that Sirius.:)

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

MMMmmm

Now I wonder if the DWP / emplyer will pay for the stuff for me to do just that?

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Well said :clap:

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

indeed not to mention just because someone like the bbc has posted something on its site it doesnt mean its fact, especially on welfare, as the bbc is notorious for posting false stuff on welfare. Now I wait for the request for a link to prove the bbc posts inaccurate stuff on welfare.

Now here is a fact.

If I started posted comments that were pro government policy and saying things like I know 10 people commiting IB fraud, I would not be asked for links.

---------- Post added at 11:27 ---------- Previous post was at 11:15 ----------

hugh.

Here is how I am linked to information without it been on the media.

I am an ex claimant.
I know many claimants.
I know them mostly because I do charity work and am in contact with many not only claimants but also advisors and legal people who provide legal assistance to claimants. I dont provide legal assistance as I am not qualified but I am able to talk to those people directly, I am also made aware of things like protests which get planned etc. and have been involved with contacting news agencies.

Sorry I cannot provide a news link for this. So as has been said you either believe me or you dont.

Incidently when I was a claimant, I spent 2.5k in legal fees to get the benefit I was entitled to, and I had to do this before the system got reformed twice and toughened up (it was tough 4 years ago never mind now), obviously the 2.5k has been paid back to me courtesy of the so called taxpayer, yeah great efficiency, lets force people to fight for their benefits and pay thousands on legal costs, appeals, commissioners hearings instead of just paying them their rightful benefit. It was estimated the DWP spent 12k to try and not pay me £90 a week.

---------- Post added at 11:38 ---------- Previous post was at 11:27 ----------

Unfortenatly there is no protection in law for a news agency in bad mouthing a group of people who arent an individual (particurly someone famous) or a company. Like libel and slander. So we can read commants like "benefit scroungers" "fiddlers" without any legal recourse to the media companies.

---------- Post added at 11:44 ---------- Previous post was at 11:38 ----------

Ahh the typical know it all who can diagnose if people can work. I dont see anyone on here 10 hours a day, so there is your first lie.

Second, posting on a forum is a lot different to having to get dressed, travel, be compliant to health and safety (not be a danger to others in workplace), have a good attendance record (fluctuating illness not allowed), be able to tolerate working environments, stress, stick to set working hours and so on. You make life sound much simpler than it is ;) I think its bad enough people guessing if people can work based on seeing them in the street but gasp over an internet forum wow.

What would most defenitly help the situation is if working from home jobs were available, ones with completely flexible hours as well to work round fluctuating conditions.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Debate is fine. But some people just argue with you whatever you say


<edit Rob: deleted>

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:30 ----------

[/COLOR]Don't take this the wrong way, as I'm not taking sides, and all cases are different. But some employers will pay people to work from home as data imputters. Although I very much doubt that there would be enough of those sort of jobs to go around all the people who are housebound

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Sadly, the first sentence I can't argue with, but the 2nd, <edit Rob - deleted>, you did post 2 contradictory posts and it is fair to ask why. (As part of the debate).

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

New to cable while i'm not on here or any other forum for anywhere near ten hours a day and therefore cannot be someone your on about i would make a couple of points. First there is a big difference between going the thirty feet to my pc and walking the 486 metres to the nearest chance of employment. I know the distance exactly because it is the goal I have for medications I try. Also if I am having anything but a good day I don't come on forums at all and it is no big deal more so given the forums I bother with regulars know I have health problems and don't complain when I might not reply for a few days an employer wouldn't be the same.

How I with it was simple as you make out because if it was I would have a job but sadly for both me and the taxpayer it isn't.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Well they were nothing to do with each other. The first one was talking about the fraudsters who are being targeted by the clamp down. Which although as usual the government have got it completely wrong, it was and still is the intention.

My comment that you think contradicts the first statement was part of a conversation.

Some people on here seem to thing that you can't have different views about different parts of a very broad topic.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Timothy, "The first one" - as you put it - was your comment "It's not the disabled who are the target."

You then subsequently contradicted yourself by stating "I bet it is on the number of cases, in which case it is in their interest to stop people DLA, and then for them to have an appeal."

Effectively, by your own admission, one cannot selectively "stop people (sic) DLA" without targetting those people who are in receipt of that particular benefit, ie "the disabled".

<edit Rob - deleted>

As I stated earlier it is apparent that even you yourself do not understand what you are posting.

It is quite clear, as several people aside from myself have pointed out to you, that you frequently contradict yourself in your posts.

It does not help that when challenged on this that you revert to accusatory denial.

<edit Rob: deleted>

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Then you would lose the argument.You can't disagree with someone by stating something is so without providing proof.That is not how debate or discussion takes place.Without proof what you say is hearsay,innuendo and suggestion all of which would lose you any case on a court of law or a debating society or a mere forum.Unless you prove what you say is true then you are not proven to be telling the truth just providing unsubstantiated gossip.

Now if we were down the pub that you could get away with this but as we are using one of the most powerful research tools then there is no excuse for you not to back up sweeping statements with the truth...unless they don't have a word of truth to them. ;)

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

I better not mention how big something is of mine then, you'll be wanting pictures.

and it's not always the case anyway. take God for example. we don't require proof that he exists when he's debated. same with a lot of things that's up for debate. if there were proof in the form of pictures or documented evidence, then there would be no topic for debate?

unless we were all in agreement.

which is highly unlikely. as not everyone likes Marmite.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Some people with disabilities are capable of some kind of work. Others, often with sickness & other debitating ailments are not. I`m often reminded that when we see someone who is disabled, we see them on one of their "good days" We very rarely see them on their "Ill days", simply because they are at home, ill.

As with members on forums who can spend hours on the PC, perhaps they are having a good day, & choose to spend time indoors. Perhaps we should then think twice, & ask ourselves why members are also absent for long periods, could it be perhaps they are too ill to spend any time on a PC?

Every genuine disabled or sick person has to live down the stigma of the useless lazy morons who deliberately & falsely claim benefits.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

If the data being inputted is electronic then they wouldn't need me to input it.

If it isn't then they'd need to pay for a decent / working cctv for me to be able to do it.

Which brings me back to who's going to pay for that kit?

There is acceess to work but it won't pay for all of that only a part of it.

The problem I find at the moment is that people really do see the cane and not my ability to do the job and are scared by the fact they may have to make adjustments (reasonable adjustments I mean). Then they also see that I am in hospital two or three times a week on average.

But I'm still working on getting a job, it's just going to take a while.

All this doesn't stop me repetedly being told I'm a benefit cheat and or scrounger, leech, drain on society, should be gassed to stop wasting rescources. All that kind of thing.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

People can say or think what they want as some people will always do that but you and l know and many others know that you have never been a benefit cheat or any of the other above things at all.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

There are those of us who know that when you were able to work you did so without complaint.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Sadly, in life other people say, think and do all sorts of things we might find distasteful. When we're confronted with those who'd judge us unfairly or make unpleasant generalised comments on the disabled, welfare claimants etc. we put it down to their ignorance and try to educate them. By ignorance, I mean lack of knowledge about the facts as opposed to a lack of intelligence or simple ill-informed prejudice. We try hard not to take such comments personally and tend to give these people the benefit of the doubt. In each case we might be right or wrong to do this but we've found that refusing to take it personally (and reacting accordingly) whenever possible makes dealing with such comments/behaviour that much easier. You can't educate everyone and letting them get you down just makes life harder.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

That Maggy is the point i had when an accusation was made that VM train there staff to lie, I challenged that statement by asking for proof, NON was forthcoming so in my eye's the statement was not validated and is therefor totally incorrect and i feel a falsehood.

I would love to continue this but it would take the thread off topic.

Well said and for those who are rightfully making claims i feel sorry for them, Why because they now have to fight for there benefits because of those who are conning the system and claiming benefits when they should not be. The system is being made harder to try and catch the benefit thieves but it is putting the legitimate claimants at a disadvantage.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Due to having my appeal adjourned I no longer have the money to travel to the hospital and back, as I can only use a taxi. So I am now having to ask for transport which will cost the government more. For your information I am paid £210 per fortnight esa and would have to pay £9 each way to the hospital 1 a week. The ESA is for me and my wife.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

I think it's more to do with cut backs and being easy targets all round, and nothing to do with the fraudsters.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Given the number of successful appeals I think you're right.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Not only are genuine claimants being put through a horrendous financial and stressful nightmare, the cost of the all the successful Appeals also worries me.

If my team of Decision Makers had been shown to have so many of their decisions overturned at the appeal stage there would have been a lot of pressure put on to us to find out why. The fact that ,up to now, it appears that no efforts are being made to sort this out makes me suspicious about the guidance being given to the DMs on how to interpret the evidence put before them and I only wish I had access to the official guidelines they have been given.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Some interesting stats here - ESA October 2011

Page 2Page 8- Support Group (for those with severe disabilities) – they receive ESA at a higher rate of benefit entitlement overall and exemption from mandatory work-related activity such as engagement with the Work Programme;
- Work Related Activity Group – they receive ESA at a higher rate of benefit than those on JSA and are mandated to engage with work-related activity such as the Work Programme;
- Fit for Work – the ESA claim is ceased but individuals can ask for a reconsideration or appeal if they disagree with the decision.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

An interesting read as you say Hugh, thanks for the link.

Having skimmed through the report I can see on the face of it that the Decision Makers appear to being kept on a very tight reign. Item 4.3.3 refers. This report only explains the statistics and I would be interested to see the Departments internal interpretation of these figures. Having a third of claimants win their WCA Appeal does seem back up the fact that something is going wrong.

Re: For those of us unfit to work
 

Yup - One in three appeals winning means (to me) that something isn't right in the initial scoring criteria.