We get the point, you don't think that ANYONE is actually unfit to work therefore no form of support payment should be made to them, even those with less than twelve months to live with a degenerative condition should be exempt from working for money rather than just receive it from the state.

I don't think that you really believe that actually, you're just acting a tw*t because it makes you feel good on the internet.

I don't understand why anyone would want to allow people to claim benefits just on the say-so of those claimants. People lie. That is actually a fact. Benefits exist because those of us fortunate enough to be in work pay taxes. It is absolutely correct that anyone claiming a benefit - whatever the benefit may be - should provide the necessary evidence to support that claim. I have to do so whenever I claim jobseekers allowance (which at present I don't have to because at present I am in work). Why should a person claiming ESA not also have to provide evidence?

I have never said we shouldn't have to provide evidence. I am quite happy to do that. What I do say is that the evidence provided by GP's, Consultants and Specialists should be used as conclusive proof of illness/disability by Atos and the DWP instead of them going against specialist advice and finding ill people fit for work. I also don't think that evidence should have to be produced every 6-12 months when its a degenerative disease or an amputee for example. They are wasting your money by assessing these people in this time frame. But hey, what do I know

Most benefits aren't provided just because a claimant asks for them, even Child Allowance has to be accompanied by evidence that a child exists, claims for WTC and CTC have application forms which are at least a dozen pages long and ask for proof of right to claim which are individually checked (I've been checked) and disability/incapacity have always required proof from suitably qualified medical professionals and sometimes an interview with the Department providing the benefit (whatever name they were using for themselves at the time).

What is bizarre about the current situation is that you have a private business examining all medical claimants without reference to their medical notes or supporting evidence from their medical practitioners - take the example of the blind mental patient that I linked to two pages back - his ATOS assessment which concluded that he was fit for work and not entitled to housing benefit was carried out by a physiotherapist who had no experience of mental health issues or knowledge of his blindness, and why would a physio be expected to understand mental health problems, more importantly why would they be placed into a job that they have no qualifications for in the same way that you wouldn't call an ice cream van if your central heating boiler broke down ?

Quote: JerryChicken "Most benefits aren't provided just because a claimant asks for them, even Child Allowance has to be accompanied by evidence that a child exists, claims for WTC and CTC have application forms which are at least a dozen pages long and ask for proof of right to claim which are individually checked (I've been checked) and disability/incapacity have always required proof from suitably qualified medical professionals and sometimes an interview with the Department providing the benefit (whatever name they were using for themselves at the time). What is bizarre about the current situation is that you have a private business examining all medical claimants without reference to their medical notes or supporting evidence from their medical practitioners - take the example of the blind mental patient that I linked to two pages back - his ATOS assessment which concluded that he was fit for work and not entitled to housing benefit was carried out by a physiotherapist who had no experience of mental health issues or knowledge of his blindness, and why would a physio be expected to understand mental health problems, more importantly why would they be placed into a job that they have no qualifications for in the same way that you wouldn't call an ice cream van if your central heating boiler broke down ?'" Judge ruled mental health assesments were "unfair" by Atos in May: blacktrianglecampaign.org/2013/0 ... l-illness/ www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... y-ill.html www.theguardian.com/society/2013 ... lth-unfair

Quote: JerryChicken "Most benefits aren't provided just because a claimant asks for them, even Child Allowance has to be accompanied by evidence that a child exists, claims for WTC and CTC have application forms which are at least a dozen pages long and ask for proof of right to claim which are individually checked (I've been checked) and disability/incapacity have always required proof from suitably qualified medical professionals and sometimes an interview with the Department providing the benefit (whatever name they were using for themselves at the time). What is bizarre about the current situation is that you have a private business examining all medical claimants without reference to their medical notes or supporting evidence from their medical practitioners - take the example of the blind mental patient that I linked to two pages back - his ATOS assessment which concluded that he was fit for work and not entitled to housing benefit was carried out by a physiotherapist who had no experience of mental health issues or knowledge of his blindness, and why would a physio be expected to understand mental health problems, more importantly why would they be placed into a job that they have no qualifications for in the same way that you wouldn't call an ice cream van if your central heating boiler broke down ?'" Judge ruled mental health assesments were "unfair" by Atos in May: blacktrianglecampaign.org/2013/0 ... l-illness/ www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... y-ill.html www.theguardian.com/society/2013 ... lth-unfair

The incident I linked to occurred in September '13 so its clear that even High Court Judges have no influence over the assessment process.

Quote: JerryChicken "This quote probably says it all ... The incident I linked to occurred in September '13 so its clear that even High Court Judges have no influence over the assessment process.'" I think because he was also blind/partially sighted, he would have had a HCP (Health Care Professional) ie the physio assess him on that. Even so, the fact the had a mental illness too should warrant a HCP who is trained in mental illness to assess him, which is, in Atos land is a "Mental Function Champion", I kid you not: www.atoshealthcare.com/claimants/faq_view/17

Quote: JerryChicken "This quote probably says it all ... The incident I linked to occurred in September '13 so its clear that even High Court Judges have no influence over the assessment process.'" I think because he was also blind/partially sighted, he would have had a HCP (Health Care Professional) ie the physio assess him on that. Even so, the fact the had a mental illness too should warrant a HCP who is trained in mental illness to assess him, which is, in Atos land is a "Mental Function Champion", I kid you not: www.atoshealthcare.com/claimants/faq_view/17

Unfortunately because Atos are a private company you cannot put in for a FoI request. But below is one put into the DWP asking that question

I'm assuming this amount doesn't cover appeals and tribunals which are paid for out of public money (and Atos gets the money even if the appeal/tribunal is overturned/sucessful, so it will be way in excess of the £801million quoted. And thats a 10 year contract, only until 2015. Considering Atos are one of the companies that have been brought in to assess DLA/PIP which will go way beyond 2015, I assume that figure will balloon again.

Please point to anyone, either on here or even in the general population, who has advocated self-certification of claimants.

I used to work with a guy who was assessed (presumably by a Doctor?) as 60% disabled due to a back injury incurred in the Paras.
Now he was regularly reassessed, and guess what people?.....yep, the 60% was signed off every time, and he continued to receive a pension which reflected this.

Oddly enough, he played a better game of golf regularly than most people I know.....

So just how disabled do you have to be to get the pittance we get? Quadruple amputee in a vegetative state probably be passed as fit to work by you - well you are a Doctor aren't you and you were at your colleagues assesments with him I presume?

All that proves is you know a lot of crap golfers

There is an unfortunate, but understandable attitude amongst many who are on benefits, in that they should be receiving much more than the system provides. They may well be occasions when this is justified, but I suspect no amount of money will compensate anyone on disability for the loss of their health.